This book made available by the Internet Archive.

LOCATIONS OF SMITHSONIAN FACILITIES

Mr. Regula. In how many different locations do you have permanent faciHties, Hke for example, Panama and you have the National Zoo facility out at Front Royal where you raise the exotic animals for zoos around the country. How many different such locations are there?

Ms. Newman. Let me just count it. I think it's six.

Mr. Yates. Do you consider Suitland a part of Washington?

Mr. Heyman. Six. It really depends on hov/ you count. We've got approximately—it depends on again how you count it. We have 16 museums and galleries, some of which are obviously in New York. We have four major research institutes in different places, Panama, Cambridge, MA. Then the Cambridge operation has telescopes and settings in both Arizona and Hawaii.

Mr. Yates. You have one in Florida.

Mr. Heyman. We have Linkport in Florida, which is part of the Natural History Museum. So it's hard to count, but it's fairly pervasive in terms of location, especially of the research facilities. Then, of course, we have the large one at Front Royal, that's an adjunct of the Zoo and does an awful lot with exotic animals, including the nurturing of endangered species and then taking those endangered species out to their prior habitats and hoping they are going to re-propagate in those vicinities.

Then SERC obviously on the Chesapeake that does an awful lot of work on riparian matters.

Mr. Regula. Do you still have the problem of the hunt down at Front Royal? I remember when Mr. Yates was chairman that we had the hearing on that subject.

Mr. Heyman. We did it again this year at SERC, but it's no problem as far as I know. Nobody has noted it. I wish that it would continue that way.

So part of this outreach is the traveling 150th exhibition and obviously the location of all of these.

SMITHSONIAN SESQUECENTENNIAL

The second thing we're going to do for the 150th is have a great big birthday party on the Mall. It's going to be quite elaborate. It's going to be on August 10th, which is the actual date of the anniversary of the passage of the statute creating us. I hope Members and staff and families think about coming, because it really will be a great party.

Mr. Yates. I don't know that you are going to get many, because I think August is the congressional recess period.

Mr. Regui^. Yes. Worse than that, it's the Republican convention. [Laughter.]

Mr. Yates. That's true.

Mr. Reguij^. But there do have to be surrogates for the rest of us.

Mr. Heyman. Need I say less.

Mr. Yates. I hope to be in Chicago. August is the only month when it doesn't snow there. [Laughter.]

Mr. Heyman. I do want you to know that all of these are being funded by other than appropriated funds. So all of this is

Mr. Yates. What all is being funded by other?

Mr. Heyman. The birthday party, the traveling exhibition are both funded—and the CBS specials—are all funded by other than appropriated funds.

Mr. Yates. Do we know who is funding them?

Mr. Heyman. Well our four primary partners, our four corporations, TWA, MCI, Intel, and Discover Card. We are busily trying to sign up a couple more, which will assure that we don't have to go into any kind of reserves.

Mr. Yates. Are they covering all the costs?

Mr. Heyman. Yes. All the costs.

Mr. Regul/.. They each put up $10 million.

Mr. Heyman. That's right. Also if need be, we'll have the availability of our share of the coin receipts once the coin is distributed, hopefully in August. I thank you all for all of the work you did.

Mr. Yates. What do you mean by the coin receipts?

Mr. Heyman. These are the commemorative coins. Congressman Yates.

Mr. Yates. Oh I see. I thought it was admission charges.

Mr. Heyman. No, no, no. That's the surcharge that comes to us. So I hope we'll have enough funding to really go through with this.

ARTRAIN

Mr. Regula. The Artrain is being sponsored at least in part by the private sector, is it not?

Mr. Heyman. Oh yes. But you know, the Artrain itself is run by a Michigan foundation. It happens that this year, the content of the Artrain is largely Smithsonian, so they are traveling our pictures. As we know, they will be in Wooster. It's going to be elsewhere in Ohio, too, but I can't remember where.

Mr. Regula. Sydney.

Mr. Heyman. In Sydney, Ohio.

Mr. Yates. Is the Artrain a part of your 150th?

Mr. HeymaI'^. Well, we're counting everything special.

Mr. Yates. But it isn't part of the exhibit itself?

Mr. Heyman. No. That's right. It's completely separate from the exhibition.

Mr. Regula. Describe it a little bit for Mr. Yates.

Mr. Yates. Have you seen the Artrain?

Mr. Regula. No.

Mr. Heyman. I don't know what's on it, but I'll find out.

Mr. Yates. You haven't seen it?

Mr. Heyman. No. I haven't seen it at all. It's an exhibition SITES put together. I haven't seen it.

Mr. Yates. SITES put together from your various exhibits?

Mr. Heyman. Well, let me look at this.

Mr. Yates. I wondered whether

Mr. Heyman. The national tour is being sponsored by Chrysler Corporation I see in the press release by the Artrain itself. The Smithsonian Associates are involved with this. They began commissioning art works to commemorate Smithsonian Institution events. The scope of the collection has grown to include events of national significance. Examples of works include Mindy Weisel's Flowers for a Country, which is a 1991 painting commemorating the end of the

Persian Gulf War. Lowell Nesbitt's History of Flight, celebrating the opening of the National Air and Space Museum, Luis Cruz Azaceta's Fragile Crossing, marking the quincentennial of Columbus' voyage to America. Other art in the celebration includes Alexander Calder, Elizabeth Catlett, Chihuly, de Looper, Gilliam, Lawrence, Mejia, O'Keeffe, et cetera.

Mr. Yates. Don't skip over Nancy Graves, who just died,

Mr. Heyman. Well, I hope I haven't.

Mr. Yates. She's a wonderful sculptor.

Mr. Heyman. Yes. In any event, that gives you a sense of what this is.

Mr. Yates. You've got wonderful artists on this.

Mr. Heyman. Absolutely wonderful.

Mr. Yates. Has the American Family Association seen this?

Mr. Regula. I can't answer that. How many cities are you going to go to, 100 is it?

Ms. Newman. Thirty communities.

Mr. Heyman. That's 30 communities it will be at.

Mr. Regula. Thirty? The Artrain?

Ms. Newman. It will stay in each town one week.

Mr. Heyman. It will stay in each place one week. We have a list of all the places.

Mr. Yates. How do you do it? Do you go off on a spur track at the places where it's supposed to go?

Mr. Heyman. It goes off on a spur track. The railroads that are involved in each of the locations are subsidizing the traveling of the show itself, and providing the space for it to be stopped.

Mr. Yates. And the public goes through the train?

Mr. Heyman. That is correct.

Mr. Yates. By any chance do you have pictures of the way in which you have done the train?

Mr. Heyman. You see, we haven't done it. It really is a separate corporation, a non-profit that does it. I don't have pictures with me, but we surely can get them.

Mr. Yates. Well I don't mean pictures of the pictures, but I mean how

Mr. Heyman. No, no. Pictures of how it's done.

Mr. Yates. How it's done. Sounds like it is fascinating. Are you getting crowds?

Ms. Newman. Yes. It was very full when it was here in Washington.

Mr. Heyman. Oh that's right. It was here in Washington. I now recall it. It was very well attended here. I think it's a grand success in terms of the numbers of people who come.

Mr. Yates. Does that have a catalogue too?

Mr. Heyman. I'm sure it does.

Mr. Yates. Could you provide that?

Mr. Heyman. I certainly will.

Mr. Regula. I think there are five cars, one for the staff, and three or four of the cars carry the actual exhibit, as I recall.

Mr. Yates. Security must be a problem, isn't it?

Mr. Heyman. I would suppose so. One of the reasons for my hesitancy in answering these questions is really the project itself is or-

1012

ganized by somebody else. The contents of the project this time are Smithsonian pictures. But we don't travel it. It's not our train.

Mr. Yates. Who organized it?

Mr. Heyman. It is a foundation in Michigan, I believe, a not-for-profit that was founded in 1971 by the Michigan Council for the Arts to provide art exhibitions and cultural programs to communities in Michigan. In 1973, Artrain traveled outside of Michigan for the first time and toured eight states. Artrain was incorporated as its own not-for-profit corporation in 1975.

Mr. Yates. Do you know whether it has received a grant from the National Endowment for the Arts?

Mr. Heyman. I don't know. But I would be surprised if it hadn't.

THE YATES RULE

Mr. Regula. Under the so-called Yates rule, a rule that was established many years ago, agencies coming before the committee should not ask another agency funded by the subcommittee for money. Well I don't know, if it applies as this is an outside corporation.

Mr. Heyman. I understand that. But this isn't

Mr. Yates. As far as I'm concerned, the Yates Rule can be repealed. As of this moment, we'll consider it repealed.

Mr. Heyman, Please put that on the record, Mr. Yates. [Laughter.]

Mr. Yates. I will be glad to. I'm in conversation with Chairman Regula referring to the so-called Yates Rule under which agencies appearing for their appropriations before the Interior Subcommittee were precluded from asking other government agencies funded in the Interior bill for grants. The theory was that if they needed money, they should come to the committee for their money rather than going to other agencies for the needed funds.

As of this moment, I think conditions have changed a great deal. I suspect that this is the time to repeal the Yates Rule. Chairman Regula and I have voted in accord to repeal it, David Skaggs, I take it is favorable to it.

Mr. Skaggs. I'd like to think about this. [Laughter.]

Mr. Yates. I suspected that.

Mr. Regula. You might be interested to know that the communities that are getting Artrain also put in some money as a prerequisite to help pay the expenses. In our case, Wooster, Ohio and RubberMaid Corporation are supporting that project. I'm sure this is true in the other 30 communities that are going to get the train as well.

We have digressed a bit this morning, but this is part of the fabric of the Smithsonian. So, Mr. Secretary, we'll go forward,

SMITHSONIAN ELECTRONIC OUTREACH

Mr. Heyman. Let me just mention a couple more things about outreach that are not absolutely new, but they are at a much greater scale than previously.

The whole electronic outreach on the Internet now is a very substantial program

Mr. Yates. Would you explain to the Members of the Committee what Internet is?

Mr. Regula. And also what you are doing, because I think the program that is going to be part of the school system in the 16th District is a good example of the outreach that you are doing.

Mr. Yates. Some of us haven't grown up with computers.

Mr. Heyman. Well, it's really just a series of interconnections, basically.

Mr. Yates. On computers?

Mr. Heyman. On computers that permit us to post a bunch of information, in this case about 35 or 40 hours on something called a Home Page of the Smithsonian, and invite anybody who has the address or can find us through some index to come to and view what we have put on the Internet. So anybody who has a computer and a modem, and thus can get into the system itself, which is possible to do, has the opportunity to see whatever is on the Internet. We have one of the largest sites on the Internet.

Now in terms of

Mr. Yates. How can we see that? I mean we have three or four computers in our office.

Mr. Heyman. We would be happy to come over and tune it in for you.

Mr. Yates. Do you need a computer of a certain value or strength in order to see this exhibition?

Mr. Heyman. Well, if you have a more powerful one, you can see graphics much more easily and much more rapidly. But words can be viewed and received through computers of lesser power.

Mr. Yates. We don't have the machines to do it in my office. We'll have to go over to the Smithsonian.

Mr. Heyman. In fact, you could probably visit this in the Speaker's office, because when we went on the Internet

Mr. Yates. The Speaker has access to certain things that ordinary members don't. [Laughter.]

Mr. Heyman. We'll be very pleased to bring one over with a modem and give you a demonstration in your office, if you'd like that.

Mr. Regula. Let me suggest that we'll arrange a demonstration for the Committee, and set it up in here.

Mr. Heyman. We would just be delighted.

Mr. Regula. I think that, plus what you are doing in the outreach to schools is really significant in terms of sharing the Smithsonian on a very broad scale. I think as part of a demonstration, you could illustrate what you are doing. We had this three State project on interaction with schools.

Mr. Heyman. Right. We have a project right now called Natural Partners. It's at the Natural History Museum. It's making available lectures, where curators and other scholars, from three places, from Natural History, from the Zoo, and to some extent from the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center, lecture. They have materials. The first one was on squids. These are received in classrooms now in three states: Tennessee, Alabama and Mississippi, and soon to open in Ohio. Then it's interactive, because teachers and school children in the classrooms receiving this can ask questions of the lecturer. There will be discussion in real time between the lecturer and those inquiring.

So it's the beginning of more and more activity where you can really bring into classrooms activities that are occurring elsewhere. You really can have discussion on real time with regard to whatever the subject matter of the class is about. It gets better and better technically so you have fewer glitches and the quality of the images and the speed with which they can be received increases. It's obviously the wave of the future in terms of communication. Now there are maybe 30 million people ready to receive this. Five to 10 years from now, when there is a coalescence of television and this kind of technology, it will be what television has become.

Mr. Yates. No way you can move it up? I don't know that I'll be here in 10 years.

Mr. Heyman. Well I feel similarly. [Laugher.]

Mr. Yates. You're a kid.

LOANS OF COLLECTIONS

Mr. Heyman. Well, those are the kinds of things we're doing. I could mention more and more in the written statement, but I do want you to know that all of the kinds of things I am talking about, trying to get the Smithsonian out and not only in Washington, is very high on the agenda of the Institution. We're going to keep working on this. We're going to work on it in the potentiality of affiliations with museums, thus heightening the potentiality of loans of materials. Actually, we loan an awful lot of material now, most of it small. Most of it is coming from Natural History. Most of it is for research. But we're beginning to loan more artifacts of size, which both gets us out and makes our collections more accessible and helps now in a minor way, but hopefully in a major way in the future in terms of collection storage and care.

SMITHSONIAN RESEARCH

So those things are going on. But I don't want you to think that we're not continuing with a very vital research program because we are. As we all know in this room, the Smithsonian has been both a research institution, as well as an exhibiting and museum institution. Given my background, I think about it in terms of museums as the education and the research is the research. So it looks a lot like a university setting. Thus, Dennis and I feel very much at home in it.

Mr. Regula. I see in your statement that you had pioneered on the yew tree, which produces taxol, which of course has become an important drug in the fight against cancer.

Mr. Heyman. That's right, sir. In addition to that, we're doing some very innovative work I gather in the kinds of gases that are used in MRIs.

Dennis, you know something about that. Perhaps you could

Mr. O'Connor. Mr. Chairman, the significance of the yew tree is that not only is the concentration of the taxol-like drug higher, it can be harvested without sacrificing the tree. The other point that the Secretary mentioned, up at the SAO, the Astrophysics Laboratory in Cambridge, we're doing some work with what are called noble gases. They are stable gases such as xenon and helium. We are finding that when they are inhaled or placed in body cavities,

they really enhance enormously the capacity to look at magnetic detail. So it's a much better imaging system.

Mr. Regula. So a patient that was going to have an MRI would inhale some of the gas?

Mr. O'Connor. Which would then pass

Mr. Regula. It accentuates the imagery?

Mr. O'Connor. That is correct.

Mr. Regula. And makes the MRI much more effective?

Mr. O'Connor. Much more detailed.

Mr. Yates. You have to use a dye now through a shot?

Mr. O'Connor. No, sir, Congressman Yates. Right now with MRI what one is actually measuring is an electron spin of hydrogen. So there's no dye. It's a non-invasive technology. This would permit the enhancement of it because the electron flips are more accentuated.

Mr. Yates. That's kind of interesting. I originally had an MRI about a year ago, and they gave me a shot because they said they wanted to trace the flow of radioactive

Mr. O'Connor. Was that an MRI, sir, or was that a positron emission tomograph, a PET scan? [Laughter.]

Mr. Yates. I think it must have been the latter. Obviously you know much more about it than I do.

Mr. Heyman. I chose pretty wisely, didn't I? There's a host of other research going on, obviously some basic and some that really turns into product. That's why I want us all to know there is a relationship between general research undertaken and often practical applications.

SMITHSONIAN/HARVARD RELATIONSHIP

Mr. Regula. You mentioned Cambridge. Is this part of Harvard or is this a separate institution that you maintain up there?

Mr. O'Connor. We maintain our own institution up there, Mr. Chairman. But we also are very closely affiliated with Harvard's Department of Astronomy and the Harvard College Observatory.

Mr. Regula. But yours is an independent organization with an association with Harvard?

Mr. O'Connor. That is correct.

Mr, Heyman. We jointly administer a Ph.D. program in astrophysics.

Mr, Yates, What does that mean? You jointly administer students who are seeking Ph,D.s in astrophysics?

Mr, Heyman. That's right. So there are instructors and scientists who belong to the Smithsonian and those that belong to Harvard who work together in this program,

Mr. Yates, Where is Irwin Shapiro in this?

Mr. Heyman. He is the boss of the whole activity, both for Harvard and for the Smithsonian,

Mr. Skaggs, Does the Smithsonian get a piece of the tuition action from Harvard for this?

Mr. Heyman, Unfortunately not,

Mr, Skaggs, Why not?

Mr, Heyman, Well, Harvard pays a lot of the expenses of the operation.

Mr. Skaggs. So we get something?

Mr. Heyman. There was a long and tough negotiation at some time in the past with regard to the sharing of costs. I think both sides feel that it is pretty fair presently, although I always want— instead of being the Harvard Smithsonian Center, I'd like them to flip that, but it has been very difficult.

Mr, Skaggs. But we do get a fair portion of costs?

Mr. Heyman. We do. We do, Congressman Skaggs.

Then of course we have a like set of relationships in Arizona, where we have telescopes. We work a lot with the University of Arizona in a very similar arrangement that enhances the product of both of those places, given the cooperation that exists between the two.

Mr. Yates. Are you involved in the third telescope on Mt. Graham controversy? The University of Arizona

Mr. Heyman. No, no, no. We're not in that at all. Right, we're not in that one at all. I wanted to talk about red squirrels, but I decided not to.

research at the SMITHSONIAN ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER

I don't know if you recall, and I'll just give you this last example of research, at the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center on the Chesapeake, there's some very interesting work going on. As an example: investigating the ballast of ships that come from, for instance, Europe or Asia and discharge their ballast into the Chesapeake. That ballast has all kinds of things, live things in it that are not natural to the Bay. They potentially can have some very dire effects with regard to fauna there.

Mr. Regula. Now that you mention that. Lake Erie or the Great Lakes in general have had a real problem with zebra mussels.

Mr. Heyman. Very similar.

Mr. Regula. These were brought in by the Russian ships that discharged their ballast in the Great Lakes and as a result we have an enormous problem that would affect obviously Lake Michigan and the whole series up there.

Mr. Heyman. Well another example of a project that's going on at SERC, which probably would interest the Chairman especially, is that they are doing a lot of experimentation in growing trees between fertilized fields and riparian streams. It is turning out that a good deal of the pesticides and the nitrates are being absorbed by the trees, and thus, never reach the riparian streams. So it's a very natural way of trying to take advantage of—I mean to cope with pollution, and probably a really quite inexpensive way if this works as well as it seems to be presently.

So there are a number of projects that are going on in various Smithsonian places that fit the descriptions that I have just stated.

REORGANIZATION

You know that with your approval, we had a fairly deep reorganization between the last time I testified here and presently. The result of that is Dennis O'Connor, who in a way has substituted for a number of assistant secretaries. We no longer have the assistant secretary roles. The whole office has been downsized considerably. The Under Secretary is working on similar things on the staff side.

So I think we're becoming a tauter institution administratively than we were previously.

Mr. Yates. What happened to the assistant secretary, for example, of the National Portrait Gallery, he was an assistant secretary, was he not?

Mr. Heyman. No, no. Just a director.

Mr. Yates. The director. Oh. Freidenheim was the assistant secretary.

Mr. Heyman. That's right.

Mr. Yates. For all of the museums.

Mr. Heyman. He's at the Wilson Center presently and will be there for another few months.

Mr. Yates. Was Hoffinann an Assistant Secretary?

Mr. Heyman. He was. Then he was the acting Provost. Now he is the Acting Director of the Air and Space Museum. But as soon as we make that appointment, he is going back to research, which he has been planning to do for some considerable period of time.

VOLUNTARY SEPARATION PROGRAM

Mr. Regula. This brings up a subject, you have asked for $3 million for buyouts in the continuing resolution. Can we be assured when you do these buyouts and reduce numbers that they won't be replaced?

Mr. Heyman. Yes.

Mr. Regula. In other words, those positions will be elinnnated in effect?

Mr. Heyman. The positions that are freed by those, there might be some backfilling, but it will be out of other positions that we have.

Mr. Regula. So there will be an overall reduction?

Mr. Heyman. There will be a reduction.

Mr. Regula. Of full-time employees.

Mr. Heyman. It gets extraordinarily complicated if one takes a look at what new provisions might be authorized in the budget for some activities. But generally speaking, yes. As you look at our FTE authorized positions at the Smithsonian, they continually go down. The buyout authority that we keep our fingers crossed we'll get tomorrow is intended to be used to reduce positions and thus make ourselves more flexible with regard to both our needs and our funding.

Mr. Yates. What do you mean by get tomorrow?

Mr. Regula. In the omnibus bill. By voting for that you will help to save money.

Mr. Yates. I do think it has one or two provisions in it that are acceptable.

Mr. Heyman. Lest I get into deep water, I won't comment.

Mr. Yates. Is that coming up tomorrow?

Mr. Regula. Tentatively. But the continuing resolution expires I think tomorrow.

Mr. Yates. I suspect it may have a

Mr. Regula. Yes, the 24th. So we'll either have to do it under a CR or pass the ominibus bill.

Mr. Yates. I don't see how we're going to do it.

FY 1997 BUDGET REQUEST

Mr. Heyman. I need not tell you too much about the budget request itself. It's all laid out. But I'll just highlight a few things.

Mr. Yates. Well, is it adequate?

Mr. Heyman. Of course not. It never is, sir. But we'll do our best with it. Actually it's not a bad one for us if we could possibly receive what is being requested it'll help us enormously, because what it will do is cover the mandatories and the inflation increases that we have lived with in the last year or so. That will be very helpful because our S&E budget went down about four percent this past year because it didn't cover mandatories and the like.

This brings that back. It has some modest enhancements. It has $38 million in R&R, in repairs and restorations, and Rick Rice is going to be talking about that in a moment, and $4 million in zoo construction, $13 million in other construction, mostly planning money. Now I know they are not absolute puts and takes, but if you compare what the conference figure was for this year against what is being sought for next year, it's about 2.8 percent greater. So it's a fairly modest request in terms of increase. But on the other hand, there was quite a lot of construction in last year's budget. There's much less in this one. Consequently, it's a different fabric of requests that are being made.

The major thing I can say with respect to this subject is that continually having to cope with the prospect of four percent decreases because of mandatories and inflation, is grim. I mean it really is grim. I know that it's not entirely in your hands in terms of what allotment the Subcommittee gets, but I just want to remind everybody that it is very difficult to cope with.

Mr. Regula. It appears to me highly unlikely that we will have any more for 1997 than we had in 1996 from the budget process. Given those circumstances, anything we would do to increase the Smithsonian has to be done at the expense of energy or Indians or forests or parks or some other of our responsibilities in this committee. So I have to say it's going to be tough to make these priority judgements. At some point, we might have to ask you to come back and have you prioritize your needs based on a downsized amount of money.

Mr. Heyman. No. I understand that. I would certainly, if it goes in that direction, I certainly would like the opportunity to set priorities—I just say though that in terms of the total amount we are asking for, it is very slightly more than last year.

repair and restoration of buildings program

Now with your permission, I would ask Rick Rice to tell you about the repair and restoration program and the capital projects that are involved in this budget request.

Mr. Rice. Mr. Chairman, I'll give you a copy of the slide presentation. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for the opportunity to talk to you about the Smithsonian's repair and restoration program and our major construction projects. The first part of the presentation is about our repair and restoration program. A lot of things have changed along Independence Avenue since 1863 in which you

see the Castle and the Capitol. The Smithsonian now has a very significant presence on the Mall.

You asked some questions earlier about the assets of the Smithsonian. We have over 300 buildings in five States, the District, and Panama. Almost 6 million square feet of space. We range from virtually new buildings to over 140 years old. We have several different types of buildings, museums, galleries, restoration and storage buil(Ungs, and centers for education and research.

Some of the challenges that we in the facilities business face are that we have over 6,000 employees and 5,000 volunteers; many of our structures are historic structures; we are open every day except one during the year, which makes maintenance scheduling imperative; and we have over 140 million artifacts that we need to protect from the elements.

COLLECTIONS MANAGEMENT

Mr. Regula. What percent of the 140 million items in your collection are on display?

Mr. Rice. I haven't been asked that before.

Mr. Regula. Will the full 140 million ever be on display?

Mr. O'Connor. An awfiil lot of that 140 million, Mr. Chairman, are in Natural History. They represent species tj^je collections that are used for research and probably aren't on display, public display.

Mr. Regula. I keep raising the question. Ultimately we can't pay the costs to maintain each storage facility and expand if we're going to ever downsize Government. I guess is there any way you have challenged the validity of keeping all 140 million items?

Mr. Heyman. Mr. Chairman, one of the things we are preparing right now, which is going to be done sometime this year and shared with you, is a collection plan that will address how to deal with the problem that you've noted.

It is true that of the 140 million objects and specimens about 120 million are in the Museum of Natural History. Many of those are minute. I mean some are smaller than insects. So in a way, 140-million artifacts doesn't give you too much of a feel of what their bulk is. But there are obviously items of bulk. There are over 3 million items in the Museum of American History, which I think is our biggest challenge with regard to determining priority of acquisition, priority in terms of retention, what kinds of things ought to be de-accessioned, and the quality of storage. That is where the focus of this paper I'm talking about is going to be.

Mr. Regula. Well, as you know, when we were out there you talked to the folks at the McKinley Museum about possible loans.

Mr. Heyman. Absolutely.

Mr. Regula. Objects you receive. Program developing, whereby local museums could get access to some of these things. Use them for the public benefit.

Mr. He\tvian. Absolutely. That's really part of this whole idea of affiliation and partnership. I really want to make this a go, over the time I am secretary.

Now one of the problems is that most of those museums don't have a lot of money either. They would like some subsidy with regard to the location of the items. But tho.se things are going to have

to get decided somehow if we're going to be able to get a lot of our artifacts out to other museums. We do have places where there are quite a few. The Anchorage Museum, for instance, is one that has a lot of the Smithsonian's Arctic materials in it. In a way, that's sort of a model of the kinds of affiliations that one can enter into.

Mr. Yates. Mr. Chairman, how does this relate to SITES? SITES does distribute various artifacts to anybody, museums, libraries, other places that will rent them. Now when Mr. Regula talked about the McKinley Museum and you said that you would possibly make available certain artifacts to the McKinley Museum, is this done through SITES at a rental, or is this done gratuitously? How is it done?

Mr. Heyman. One is going to have to make a determination of how it's to be done. SITES really travels exhibitions. It puts together exhibitions and they travel.

Mr. Yates. For institutions like the McKinley Museum.

Mr. Heyman. For institutions like that, right. A second way of doing like things, although it wouldn't be the same, would be to take some artifacts that don't have great opportunity to be shown in the relevant museum here in Washington, and lend them on a long-term basis to some other institution. For instance, we've begun conversations with the museum community that is getting established in Long Beach, California. One of those museums is to be a maritime museum. We have case after case of ship models largely from the 19th century that we can't display because they are much too bulky. So they are in storage. At least in very preliminary conversations, there's a possibility that Long Beach would like, and at their expense, for us to ship those out for semi-permanent loan. We would make sure that the conditions under which they would be displayed and stored would be good ones. It's that kind oT thing that I am trying to develop, Mr. Yates.

BUILDING INSPECTION PROGRAM

Mr, Rice. In order to assess the condition of the facilities, we have a systematic inspection program where we use in-house staff and contract professionals; for example, elevators and chilled water plants where we don't have the in-house expertise, we'll hire a consultant. We do it at regular intervals. We measure our buildings by current industry standards.

Some typical actions during our inspection process

Mr. Yates. Are you talking about the actual physical building?

Mr. Rice. Yes, sir. I am talking about

Mr. Yates. What happens with respect to the artifacts that are within those buildings? For example, the Corcoran Gallery of Art. Your program looks at the building.

Mr. Rice. Yes, sir.

Mr. Yates. Okay. I don't mean Corcoran, I mean Hirshhorn. Yours looks at the building itself Do you have an inspection program? I don't know that this is your field, but

Mr. Rice. Well, each museum director has specialists on their staff who keep track of it.

Mr. Yates. Do they go around and take a look at each of the paintings and drawings?

Mr. Rice. Yes, sir.

Mr, Yates. To see what the condition is?

Mr. Rice. Yes, sir.

Mr. Yates. Does someone testify as to that?

Mr. Rice. Yes, sir. I can get specifics on that.

Here, we're inspecting the American Art and Portrait Gallery, which is our oldest structure where we have some water damage, and the evaporator tower has some problems.

Roofs are of great concern to the Smithsonian, because they are paramount to maintaining the integrity of the building. Sometimes we find problems but we don't have the money to do anything other than apply a bandaid. This is the Natural History building, where we've taken plastic and buckets to take care of a problem.

We have the capability to inspect our many miles of pipelines. If we find a pipeline that is asbestos-covered, we have the technology, the equipment, and the training to get in and properly inspect it.

If you look at a building in terms of systems, it's a series. It's just like your home. You have a heating and air conditioning system. Industry standards have been set for these systems. For example, elevators, typically 35 years unless the codes change; roofs last 25 to 30 years. In many cases, the Smithsonian systems are well beyond this point. We have done this through careful maintenance. We're also doing it at great expense because the older a system is—it's like finding parts for an old car. They get very expensive and hard to find.

We have adopted at the Smithsonian a methodology for looking at our buildings and assessing their condition that was developed by the Building Research Board with the National Research Council. It looks at a system. Any physical asset, when you buy it is in excellent condition. Over time it will decay unless you renew it. When it gets down into this area, it gets very expensive to maintain.

REPAIR AND RESTORATION OF BUILDINGS ASSESSMENT

We have looked at each of the systems through our inspection program at the Smithsonian. For some of our major buildings, we have made an assessment, a composite of what condition we think the systems are in. We have four buildings that are in an area where we are most concerned. Natural History, American Art and Portrait Gallery or the Patent Office Building, Arts and Industries, and the Castle or Smithsonian Institution Building. They are moving down into the area where it's costing a lot of money to maintain them.

I want to show you some particular examples. We think our total problem is in the order of $250 million. If you look at it by type of problem, roof repairs in the $80 million range; fire protection, life safety, code compliance, $45 million; and the rest is in mechanical, electrical systems, and general repairs.

If you look at it by building, and once again this is just looking at our major buildings, the predominant problem is in Natural History. I'll talk about that in a minute. It is our largest building with over a million square feet. You don't see American History up there because we have just finished a program over the last eight to ten years to totally renew the systems in the American History Building. We did a similar program with the Freer.

Some of our principal concerns are that the collections are at risk and the deterioration is accelerating in historic buildings. We have the four buildings I mentioned. We are worried about denying the public access to parts of the collection when systems fail.

Of the four buildings, we are most concerned about Natural History, which was built in 1910 and the wings were added in the 1960s. That was the last time any systems were upgraded. The deficiencies are in the $100 million range. There is one more historic slide. This is the technology that built the Natural History building. Notice the horse-drawn dump truck. Many of the systems, the electrical systems especially, have partj that go back to the beginning, to the construction of the building. We need to upgrade these systems.

The other three buildings we are most concerned about are the Patent Office building, which was built in sections in the mid-1800s, about $40 million. We are most concerned here about the roof and some of the mechanical systems inside.

The Castle was last renovated in the early 1960s. Built in the mid-1800s, it has mechanical, electrical, and life safety problems. And the Arts and Industries building, built in 1879, primarily has mechanical problems.

We have done a projection for the requested level of $38 million in R&R. If you remember back to the earlier slide, we made very little progress because our experience is that decay and growth in the backlog is in the $25 to $35 million range.

The Smithsonian Commission on the Future recommended a funding level of $50 million. If we were to get that funding level for five years, we feel we could get all of the buildings into the acceptable range.

In conclusion, I want you to understand that we do measure our requirements in terms of industry standards and they reflect valid needs. Increased funding is critical to properly protect the collections and the people. I'd like to request your continued support.

NATIONAL AIR AND SPACE MUSEUM DULLES CENTER

I also mentioned I was going to discuss two of our major construction projects. The first is the extension to the National Air and Space Museum, to be located at Dulles Airport. Of course, you know the facility on the Mall was completed in 1976 and has on display about 20 percent of our aircraft. Except for a small number of objects on loan, the rest of the collection, which is aircraft, spacecraft, and many small parts and other components associated with flight, is stored primarily at the Garber facility. These buildings, many of them dating from the 1950s, are old, metal pre-engineered buildings. This is how the collection is stored. It's difficult for researchers to get to it. It is difficult to protect it from the weather when we have failing roofs. It's difficult, if not impossible, to allow public access to those.

Mr. Yates. You do have some public access?

Mr. Rice. Yes, sir. Only limited public access.

Mr. Yates. Limited in time or

Mr. Rice. Even if we got the public in there, you can't move around in a lot of the buildings.

This is the way some of the more delicate engine parts and power plants are stored. This is not a very satisfactory solution. Congress recognized this and authorized us to look into an extension at Dulles. These are aircraft stored at Dulles. I'm still showing you the collection that is not on display. This is a Super Constellation. This is the Blackbird, which is now in that temporary hangar. This is the space shuttle Enterprise, arriving in 1985 to be part of the Dulles facility. It is still out there, but it's not accessible to the public. It's difficult to maintain in the current facility.

We have chosen a 185-acre site in the Dulles complex outlined in red at the bottom of the chart there. These are our initial concepts for this facility. There is a new interchange off Route 28 called the Bamsfield Interchange that the State has agreed to put in. Along with it, the State is going to put in the access road and the taxi way to the tune of approximately $40 million. Our new facility is shown here in yellow. The property goes like this. This is a light industrial and a police vehicle training facility. Also, Dulles has retained property to put in a possible additional runway. Our facility is sited so as not to conflict with that, should they ever build it.

This is a concept of the facility. The parking lots are over in this area. The public enters here. All the public spaces, including the theater, are on this side. This is the main exhibition hangar, which has aircraft on the floor and hanging from the ceiling. The public can walk on the floor or on a series of walkways. The space shuttle and space hangar are back here. The conservation hangar facility is out here. The public can walk through that facility in a protected walkway.

This is what the footprint looks like. This is the Mall museum which is about 600,000 square feet. This is the Air and Space Museum extension. The first increment, which does not include this piece, is under 500,000 square feet. This piece is a possible additional increment for storage and study space.

This is another rendering from the side that shows you the public access. Over in this area, which I didn't mention earlier, is where the cafeteria, the shops, the educational spaces are. The public can walk on the floor or on the walkways. They go back and see the space shuttle and other things. This is the current concept for the Dulles facility. We have requested design money for this in the budget.

NATIONAL MUSEUM OF THE AMERICAN INDIAN, MALL MUSEUM

The other major construction project we are working on is the Mall museum for the National Museum of the American Indian. Just a little background on the American Indian Museum. Of over a million items in the collection, many of them are fragile, painted feathers, leathers. Currently most of the collection is stored at our Bronx facility in conditions such as this, where it's very difficult to study the collection. The public does not have access. We are doing our best to maintain it, but it is a challenge.

We did open the Heye Center facility in the Alexander Hamilton Custom House building in New York in 1994, which offers limited space for display of the collection and for native ceremonies. Very little of the collection is on display, but it is available to the public

in New York. The remainder of the collection will be moved down to our Cultural Resources Center to be constructed in Suitland, Maryland. We are waiting for the last little bit of money so that we can complete evaluating our proposals and get the contract awarded.

The collection, however, will be displayed on the Mall. This is an artist's rendering of a new facility on the Mall right here. I'll show you that in a little more detail later. This is the National Gallery of Art East Wing and the Air and Space Museum. The facility as currently conceived would take about 24 percent of the plot of land that is identified in the legislation, which you just saw in the previous slide.

Some size comparisons. The building that we have proposed to build is about 250,000 square feet. That's a small building compared to the East Wing of the National Gallery. It's about three-quarters of that. It's about one-fifth of the Natural History Museum and about a third of the American History Museum. So you get an idea on size comparison. This is a rendering of it. Circles and curved surfaces are important to native peoples who were consulted heavily on this. We also have ledges similar to what you might find in the southwest.

Looking at it from another view, the public will come probably from the direction of Natural History and Air and Space, up this path and enter the building through a Potomac, as it's being referred to at this point. The first floor is all public space. It has a theater. It has shops, a cafeteria, and some minor exhibitions. Primary exhibition space is in the upper floors. Off in to this direction is the Botanic Garden. All of this land around the building will be landscaped in native plants in harmony with the Botanic Garden. We have the same landscape architect as the Botanic Garden.

That is the end of my presentation, sir. I'd be happy to entertain any questions.

Mr. Regula. Do you want to finish or does this complete your statement?

Mr. Heyman. I think that completes our presentation, Mr. Chairman. We stand ready to answer, seek to answer any questions you might have.

SMITHSONIAN PRIORITIES

Mr. Regula. I am concerned as I look at this, you are talking about $250 million now that's needed for repair and renovation if you had it. Correct?

Mr. Rice. That's correct.

Mr. Regula. And the budget calls for what, $38 million. At the same time, operations and maintenance, salaries up about $20 million. I am not sure I agree with those priorities. You are adding costs to your personnel at the same time we're neglecting something that will only get much worse if we continue to let it go.

Mr. Heyman. Well, I really understand the dilemma. We have discussed it before. I really don't have a more satisfactory answer than I stated last year. It seemed to me that we are obliged to follow through on the commitments that everybody had made, both the Institution and the Congress, with regard to the Mall museum for the National Museum of the American Indian. We have so far

raised $31 million of the $36 million that was to be the share or at least within the range of the share that was supposed to come from other than Federal sources.

We have also done our best, as Dennis C£in describe to you if you wish, to minimize what the additional operational expenses would be for that.

Mr. Regula. Forty million, as I read your statement, that you anticipate the Indian Museum would add $40 million to your operating cost.

Mr. Heyman. No. Do you want to speak about that, Dennis?

Mr. O'Connor. Mr. Chairman, I think that what—I think that it is very unlikely that we can add the Mall museum or the Dulles Center without some increase in cost. I think that we will approach those increases in costs by attempting to reduce our expenses in other areas. I think we will approach it by a very aggressive private philanthropy and fundraising programs. I think that we will be left, if we are successful in those two arenas, still with some marginal increase in cost, probably on the order of $10 million or so for both museums.

ADMISSION FEES

Mr. Regula. Have you contemplated fees for access to museums? I know this is an old topic, but the regents have looked at it. Is there any conclusion?

Mr. O'Connor. I'll let the Secretary deal with that.

Mr. Heyman. We're going to have a rather detailed report that was asked for by the Senate Appropriations Committee on fees. I really don't want to say what the outcome will be because the Regents are going to make that determination at the meeting on May 5. The probabilities are that they will not rule out the possibility at some time for fees, but would not wish to adopt them presently, but I'm just not sure. This really is something that the Regents are deeply involved with, and the new ad hoc committee on policy and programs and priorities that the Regents created has been working on this question itself. So I think it would be premature for me to state it. But, obviously, there are—there's some consideration being given anew to the potentiality of fees sometime.

Mr. Regula. Aren't most of the major museums around the world charging fees, in many cases rather substantial fees?

Mr. Heyman. Many do. I just came back from London, where I was last week. There are some of the museums that are not. The British Museum, for instance, still does not charge fees, but Natural History does; the Science Museum does, and a number of the others do. So there's been a considerable

Mr. Yates. Does the Tate Museum?

Mr. Heyman. The Tate? You know, I'm just trying to think, having been in it. I think so. Congressman Yates. I'm not absolutely sure. I got in early with a group of people, so I don't remember for sure.

Mr. Yates. They probably paid your entry.

Mr. Heyman. But I think they do.

NATIONAL MUSEUM OF THE AMERICAN INDIAN OPERATING COSTS

Mr. Regula. Well, I notice in the response to last year's question, overall total cost, you said the National Museum of American Indians, $8 million for the Custom House in New York, which is now open

Mr. Heyman, Yes.

Mr. Regula [continuing]. $55 million for Suitland, which I assume would be a storage facility.

Mr. Heyman. You mean for capital costs?

Mr. Regula. No, this is operations.

Mr. Heyman. No, sir.

Mr. Regula. Oh, this is capital, but the operations

Mr. Heyman. Yes.

Mr. Regula. Yes, for the capital, and the

Mr. Heyman. Yes. But it's even less than $55 million.

Mr. Regula [continuing]. And $80 million for the Federal funding of the museum, but I think you estimated total operating cost at $40 million.

Mr. Heyman. I don't know where that is. Do you know where that is [speaking to staff]?

Mr. Regula. For all the facilities. I'm talking about New York, Suitland, and the Museum on the Mall.

Mr. Heyman. Yes, it could be. I mean, that would be similar to— when you put all of those together, that would be similar to Natural History.

Mr. Regula. Which means if we go with this program, you're going have to try to absorb $40 million, and the rest of your budget, as you say, is a flat number.

Mr. Heyman. Well, excuse me just for a second. It just was brought to my attention at least—is this in our budget presentation? Well, then, we have to make this available to you.

We have been working these figures, and we continue to work them, but we have worked them so that in the year 2002, when the Mall Museum would open, the total operating expenses of all of the facilities

Mr. Regula. You're talking about New York, Suitland

Mr. Heyman. That's right.

Mr. Regula [continuing]. The storage facility, and the Museum?

Mr. Heyman. Correct. It's $26,881,000 for all three NMAI facilities. So there's been a considerable reduction in whatever the older figures were. We have been tr5ring to listen.

Mr. Regula. Well, you know, this is one of my concerns

Mr. Heyman. Sure.

Mr. Regula. Things we do now have great downstream costs, and if in fact we are going to downsize government, we've got to start planning now to hold down expenditures prospectively, and I have real concerns that that won't necessarily happen. I don't know how our successors on this committee are going to be able to meet your needs, and your successors are going to have to try to do it, too.

Mr. Heyman. I understand that, and I just come back to that this is catching us in midstream when

Mr. Regula. I know.

Mr. Heyman [continuing]. When we really made a lot of promises and we collected a lot of money on the basis of those promises

Mr. Regula. I understand.

Mr. Heyman [continuing]. Which really makes it extraordinarily difficult to withdraw.

Mr. Regula. Oh, I understand that.

NATIONAL AIR AND SPACE MUSEUM DULLES CENTER OPERATING

COSTS

I think in the case of the Dulles facility, we still are at a point where we have to decide whether we want to go that route. We're not committed to any long-term thing there.

Mr. Heyman. That's correct.

Mr. Regula. Yes, Virginia, of course, will build you infrastructure, but the operating is the big item, and maybe that would be a pay-as-you-go with fees.

Mr. Heyman. Okay. Well, two things about it: first of all, where we are at the moment with respect to added operating costs, the max is about $5 million, right? So what we're talking about is $5 million in the combination of the Garber facility and the Dulles Center.

Mr. Regula. You're talking about operating?

Mr. Heyman. That's right, operating expenses. Now if we're really pushed in terms of availability as time goes on, I am sure that we would seriously contemplate fees for that facility, which might be okay in relationship to a facility away from the IVIall and in another setting. I don't think we'd like to do that, but I keep thinking about fees in accord with my recollections of tuition at the University of California at Berkeley; it was sacrosanct not to have tuition, but when it became apparent that the State of California simply couldn't pay, then one viewed that possibility differently.

My guess—that's sort of my intuitive sense about the fee question, and it might be the simplest, if need be, if it came to that, to contemplate fees in a place like the Dulles Center.

Mr. Regula. Well, I think we, collectively—^you as the managers and we as the subcommittee—have to think about where we want to be five or ten years from now in terms of cost and on the assumption that we're probably going to be on short rations as far as government is concerned for a long time to come.

Well, I have a number of other questions, but I've used my time. Mr. Yates?

government downsizing

Mr. Yates. I hate to contemplate the Smithsonian that you're building, Ralph. It's been such a glorious exhibition over the years. We really haven't worried too much about the money because we permitted Smithsonian to expand over the years.

Mr. Regula. I understand, but that's part of our problem.

Mr. Yates. Well, when you downsize government, the question is whether you downsize places like the Smithsonian or do you downsize the parks? Do you close the parks? Do you close the Smithsonian when you downsize? Do you close part of the Smithsonian? This is one of the great institutions in the world, and we

ought to be building it up instead of tearing it down. And it just doesn't make sense to me.

I have a feeling that

Mr. Regula. If you'd yield—I don't disagree with you, but the reality is that we only have so many dollars, as you know that.

Mr. Yates. I wish we didn't have to face the reality. Maybe—who knows what will happen?

SUFFICIENT REPAIR AND RESTORATION FUNDING

At any rate, is $38 million enough for you for taking care of the physical properties of the Smithsonian?

Mr. Rice. I think it's a reasonable amount for this year. I agree with the Commission on the Future that $50 million would be better.

Mr. Yates. Well, $50 million would be better, but the question is, What do you need? You showed us pictures of the roof just leaking, a torrential amount of water coming into your museum. You're trying to collect it in plastic and buckets and a few other things. What building was that, incidentally?

Mr. Rice. That's Natural History.

Mr. Yates. I thought you were redoing Natural History?

Mr. Heyman. Well, we're doing the East Wing and the West Wing. The East Wing on Federal appropriations

Mr. Yates. Well, what happens to the old wing? Is the old wing just allowed to die?

Mr. Heyman. No, the old wing has to be part of this program, clearly.

Mr. Yates. Well, of course it does.

Mr. Rice. Natural History is very high on our priority list, and

Mr. Yates. I remember in the old days, when we reviewed your construction program, you worried more than anything else about the leaks in roofs. Don't you still have those?

Mr. Rice. Yes, sir.

Mr. Yates. Yes, but—well, how far will $38 million take you?

Mr. Rice. Thirty-eight million will take us a lot farther than we've been getting in prior years, and I really appreciate the support. Fifty would be a better number because that's what the Commission on the Future—^with $38 million we can stem the tide and start making some progress.

Mr. Yates. Well, what is the difference between $38 and $50 million in terms of what you could do?

Mr. Rice. Our backlog grows on the order of $25 to $35 million a year. So virtually every dollar you get over, say, $35 million goes totally into system renewal. So with every new dollar over that range, I don't have to spend any of it for bandaids and other solutions, if I'm making that clear.

Mr. Yates. No, you're not making it clear. I mean, here

Mr. Rice. If we were to get the Commission level. Commission-recommended level

Mr. Yates. Yes, 38, "little progress is made because of the size of the backlog and the rate of deterioration of aging systems."

Mr. Rice. Yes, sir.

Mr. Yates. Well, that isn't a very happy future, is it? You're going to have a rate of deterioration that will be devestating—^you won't be able to hold it with $38 million, will you?

Mr. Rice. Well, we think we can hold it, sir, and maybe make slight progress. That's what's reflected in there. At the Commission recommended level of fifty, we can make significant progress.

Mr. Yates. Like what? I'm trying to find out—and perhaps you'd rather do it for the record

Mr. Rice. Well, our primary—^yes, sir, if I could do it for the record, but our emphasis is going to be on Natural History and we want to go through the building system by system and upgrade the building.

Mr. Yates. Okay.

[The information follows:]

REPAIR AND RESTORATION OF BUILDINGS

The following charts illustrate the significant progress that could be made in ameliorating the condition of Smithsonian facilities if $50 million were made available annually as recommended by tlic Commission on the Future of the Smithsonian Institution. CHART 1 shows that 2 museum buildings, the National Museum of Natural History (NMNH) and the American Art and Portrait Gallery building (AAPG), have already fallen below the minimimi acceptable performance level. Two more buildings. Arts and Industries and the Smidisonian Institution "Castle" are rapidly nearing that state. CHART 2 projects that all four buildings would be restored to the "Good" range at the end of five years at this funding level.

Life-Cycle Time in Years

CHART 1: Smithsonian Facilities Conditions in 1996

Life-Cycle Time in Years

CHART 2: Projected Smithsonian Facilities Conditions in FY 2001 at $50 million annually as recommended by the Commission on the Future of the Smithsonian Institution

PRIORITIES FOR INCREASED R&R FUNDING

Mr. Yates. The $12 million, then, will almost all go to Natural History?

Mr. Rice. If we were to get the incremental amount, yes, sir.

Mr. Yates. That's the building that's really in trouble?

Mr. Rice. We have four buildings in trouble.

Mr. Yates. Yes.

Mr. Rice. But the two

Mr. Yates. Which four?

Mr. Rice. The Castle, Arts and Industries, Natural History, and the American Art and Portrait Gallery or the Patent Office Building. Of those four. Natural History and the Patent Office Building are our greatest concern.

Mr. Yates. Why?

Mr. Rice. This is the condition. Of course, in the Patent—they both have water

Mr. Yates. The Patent Building

Mr. Rice. I'm sorry.

Mr. Yates [continuing]. Is the one that has the Portrait Gallery?

Mr. Rice. Yes, sir.

Mr. Heyman. And American art.

Mr. Yates. Well, that's a magnificent building. You can't allow that to deteriorate.

Mr. Rice. No, sir, that's why we've given it a high priority.

Mr. Yates. Well, when you give it a high priority, is $38 million going to take care of it? Your highest priority is Natural History, you said.

Mr. Rice. Yes, sir.

Mr. Yates. Well, how much—how far down the line is the Patent Office Building?

Mr. Rice. It's next.

Mr. Yates. This is the building where Abraham Lincoln danced at his second inaugural.

Mr. Rice. It is; that's right.

Mr. Yates. And, to me, that's the most important building you've got because of its historical connotation. How much do you need to put that in shape?

Mr. Rice. Well, we think the total problem is in the order of $40 million. We can't spend it all at once because we can't close the facility down.

Mr. Yates. Forty million for this one building?

Mr. Rice. Yes, sir.

Mr. Yates. And how much have you allocated under the $38 million to this building?

Mr. Rice. In 1996, we plan to spend, if we get the 1996 money

Mr. Regula. So, see, you need to vote for it. [Laughter.]

Mr. Rice. To keep in perspective, sir, I have less than $24 million right now because I don't

Mr. Yates. For that building or

Mr. Rice. For the whole program. So I'm very thankful for the support we're getting. [Laughter.]

We plan to spend $4 million on the roof.

24-697 96-33

Mr. Yates. You'd be more thankful for more support, wouldn't you? [Laughter.]

Mr. Rice. We're starting with the roof, which has serious problems.

Mr. Yates. Which building are we on?

Mr. Rice. We're in the Patent Office Building

Mr. Yates. Okay. All right.

Mr. Rice [continuing]. Also known as the American Art and Portrait Gallery.

Mr. Yates. Yes.

Mr. Rice. That building we plan to spend $4 million on the roof.

Mr. Yates. You need $40 million for that?

Mr. Rice. No, four; the total requirement is forty.

Mr. Yates. Forty, yes. All right. And you plan to spend four?

Mr. Rice. In 1996.

Mr. Yates. Will that take care of the whole roof?

Mr. Rice. Yes, sir.

]Vfr. Yates. Okay.

Mr. Rice. And then we intend in 1997, with part of the $38 million, to start working on some of the mechanical system deficiencies. I showed you the cooling tower, which is decayed and really needs to be replaced.

Mr. Yates. Well, now what happens to the artifacts then? What happens to all these magnificent paintings in the National Portrait Gallery and in the American Art Museum? If your cooling system is on the blink, aren't they likely to deteriorate?

Mr. Rice. Yes, sir, we have to maintain proi)er temperature and humidity standards.

Mr. Yates. Are you doing it now?

Mr. Rice. Yes, sir, at great expense. I mentioned earlier that the systems are so old

Mr. Heyman. Yes, let me just give an example. In my office in the Castle, which needs new

Mr. Yates. It's a beautiful office. [Laughter.]

Mr. Heyman. Yes, but the air conditioner isn't a beautiful air conditioner.

Mr. Yates. I see.

Mr. Heyman. So

Mr. Yates. Well, we'll get you some fans. [Laughter.]

Mr. Heyman. This is just an example. So what happens? Five or six times during the summer season, people have to come up and take apart this old air conditioner and then try to fabricate parts and put it back together again. If we had a new air conditioner, we wouldn't have to have those visits. So he's having to spend an awful lot of money maintaining systems that are really too old and too decrepit. And so his own view is, and obviously ours is, that if we can start to replace equipment of this sort on a regular basis, as you would anywhere. It will reduce—it will reduce our entire

optimal r&r funding level

Mr. Yates. How much money do you need for that? Mr. Heyman. Well, $50 million a year, okay? Mr. Yates. For how many years?

Mr. Heyman. Oh, well, forever in a way.

Mr. Yates. Oh.

Mr. Heyman. Fifty million dollars a year will bring all of these buildings here that are below the acceptable level up above the acceptable level, and it will start to push all the buildings closer and closer to this end, where you would say the building's in excellent or good shape.

Mr. Yates. So you need another $12 million over your $38 million?

Mr. Regula. If you'll yield, Mr. Yates

Mr. Yates. Sure.

Mr. Regula. This report of the Commission on the future of the Smithsonian, which was done for the board, is very well done. I think it's a good document. It says a total of $50 million each year for the next decade

Mr. Yates. Why don't we give it to them?

Mr. Regula. Well, I'd like to, but then the Secretary's going to have to tell us where he's going to get that extra $12 million out of his budget, because we aren't going to have more money; he'll have to squeeze his budget $12 million somewhere else.

Mr. Yates. What happens to your budget if the $12 million goes to construction?

Mr. Heyman. It obviously depends upon where you would take it out. If you took it out of the construction budget, it would mean that we wouldn't progress on the Indian Museum, because that's the major construction budget item that we have.

So—I'm sa3dng this off the top of my head.

Mr. Yates. How much are you asking for the Indian Museum this year?

Mr. Heyman. Four million dollars this year for the finishing of the

Mr. Yates. How do you get $12 million out of this year's

Mr. Heyman. Oh, you mean this year's budget?

Mr. Yates. Yes. We're talking about putting another $12 million into his budget. Where are we going to get $12 million?

Mr. Heyman. I'll have to sit down and try to figure it out. I guess my priority at the moment is pretty much reflected by this budget.

fundraising

Mr. Yates. How much have you been raising from private sources? I know that you've been trying to do this for years. Has it been

Mr. Heyman. We raised $49 million last year, but

Mr. Yates. From private sources?

Mr. Heyman. Yes. Yes.

Mr. Yates. That's a lot, isn't it?

Mr. Heyman. Yes, it would be if it was unrestricted. The problem is that most of it comes in in restricted form, and it's very hard to raise money for renovation and repair.

Mr. Yates. I know.

Mr. Heyman. So it's coming in, and it's coming in at a heightened level. The major source that can be utilized for these purposes—but we've got to get a lot more efficient than we are now— are the business enterprises of the Institution.

' Mr. Yates. Well, what happens if you don't have the money? You don't have exhibitions for your museum?

Mr. Heyman. Well, I think

Mr. Yates. Are they feeling that impact now? You'll have to put up money for exhibitions, won't you, if you

Mr, Heyman. Oh, the rate of change of exhibitions now at the Smithsonian is less than it used to be because we've got to find 4 percent of our budget in salaries and expenses someplace. Our reaction is to start to say, "Should we continue to do the kinds of long-term, very expensive exhibitions or should we start to do— should we do ones that are less expensive that might, thus, be able to change more often?" And every museum that we have is going through these sets of decisions, but right now the fact is we're putting on fewer new exhibitions than we used to.

Mr. Yates. What about your scientific research; has that been cut back?

Mr. Heyman. What would you say, Dennis, in terms of scientific research?

Mr. O'Connor. I think it's stabilized. It's not expanding into the areas into which we would really hope to expand over the near future.

Mr. Yates. Am I taking too much time?

Mr. Regula. Go ahead and finish.

Mr. Yates. I'm sorry.

Mr. O'Connor. It's stabilized, Congressman Yates. I don't think it is

Mr. Yates. At a low level or a higher level?

Mr. O'Connor. Well, I think my comparison is only over the past couple of years, being relatively new to the Smithsonian. I think it's stabilized over the past couple of years.

Mr. Yates. You don't look for new subjects, then, do you?

Mr. O'Connor. Well, we do, sir, but we have to look for new money to support those new subjects.

Mr. Yates. Yes. Okay, thanks, Mr. Chairman.

SETTING PRIORITIES

Mr. Regula. Mr. Nethercutt?

Mr. Nethercutt. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

This is a very interesting discussion. I think Mr. Yates and you, Mr. Chairman, illustrate life in today's world. The Smithsonian's no different. You have a champagne appetite with beer income, and we struggle with that.

I wonder if in your quest to maintain what you have, you shouldn't make sure that your priorities are set in that direction and not in the direction of adding $110 million for the Indian Museum. I mean, maybe we just have to face the harsh reality that we have to wait a little bit longer on that one. I know you've raised some money privately, and my sense is that, even under the authorization that the Congress granted last year, you're not restricted to just a third.

Mr. O'Connor. Oh, that's perfectly true.

Mr. Nethercutt. You could do it all privately if you had the resources. I'm troubled by the fact that we're not maintaining these buildings the way they ought to be maintained, and it seems to me

we ought to really take care of what we have first before we start expanding or trying to expand, even though we want to expand.

Mr. Heyman. Sure, I understand that. I mean, I don't know what the proportions ought to be, but in the original conception the whole—the collections and conservation facility in Suitland—was to be paid by Federal appropriations, and the way it's now worked out, assuming that we get the 1996 budget in an omnibus bill, and we get back to conference level, we're having to pick up $9 million that we hadn't planned on before. And I understand that, and I think those are the kind of compromises that one really has to talk through. And I wouldn't be surprised, if this goes forward on the Mall, that we will have to talk through with the committee staff and with the chairman other ways of adding to what our original expectation was. So I think all of those are really open, at least from my perspective, for conversation.

Mr. Nethercutt. I heard your testimony with regard to the amount of private donations and funding sources you have. The information I have before me is that you were expecting that you would receive about $119, almost $120 million in nonappropriated funds in 1996. Is that number accurate?

Mr. Heyman. Oh, well, I see. Putting everything together

Mr. Nethercutt. Yes, that's what I'm looking

Mr. Heyman [continuing]. First, obviously, we have to net it because, in terms of the museum shops and the catalog sales, and all the rest, it costs us quite a lot of money to make the money. But if you put all that together, plus the advantageous things that are happening this year, like the $40 million that we're getting from the corporate partners of the American—of the show that's traveling around the United States, that figure sounds about right. But some of it is one-time money in terms of raising money or producing money from enterprises. And so I can't rely on that. . The hardest figures are really in terms of unrestricted monies, which are the kind of funds that could be devoted to the purposes that we're talking about. The net from the business enterprises is presently around $28 million, and we're trying our very best to edge that up, but it's hard to do anything fast. In terms of donations, of the $49 million that we raised last year, I know that no more than $8 or $9 million of that's unrestricted money. The balance is all restricted money.

Mr. Nethercutt. Is there utility in having a call to the Nation, whether it's corporate sponsors or individuals like you or me, that says we need $50 million a year to make sure that the national treasures are maintained and the buildings are maintained? Would that be counterproductive or productive?

Mr. Heyman. Oh, I think it's very productive so long as there's a general agreement between the committee and the Institution that we net that, because if all we're doing is put-and-take money, then it's very hard to raise it. But if you can say to the donors every penny you give is an add-on to what is the base, then you can do pretty well.

And it is certainly my intention—and, thus, the intention of the Smithsonian administration—to continue to go higher and higher in terms of what we receive. As a matter of fact, we've just begun the arduous process for a capital campaign for the Smithsonian,

something we've never done before. And, of course, all of those things take time.

But it is clear—and the chairman and I have had these conversations, too—it is clear that we are going to have to be more dependent on the private sector in giving and in our business enterprises, and we're taking that very seriously because I know perfectly well, from the point of view of what's happening fiscally, at least presently, that we're going to have to look to the outside for enhancements.

CONSERVATION RESEARCH CENTER

Mr. Nethercutt. Two quick questions, if I may, Mr. Chairman: with regard to your funding and your priorities and your squeezing the budget to get all that you can get out of it. You have the Conservation Research Center at Front Royal, Virginia. It employes about 55 people, and I understand this consumes about a third of the National Zoo's budget. Do you feel that that's still justified, the expenditure for that Conservation Research Center? Can we save any money there? Might you consider—^and I know I'm asking multiple questions

Mr. Heyman. Yes, I'm sorry, I'm just talking-

Mr. Nethercutt. That's all right. Would you consider possible elimination or consolidation of the CRC as a means of getting the extra $12 million, or whatever it might be, to help these buildings

Mr. O'Connor. We might be able to save at the margin. Congressman, and

Mr. Heyman. Excuse me just for a second. The operating budget from Federal appropriations, I am told by the Director of that, is $3.5 million a year.

Mr. Nethercutt. Okay.

Mr. Heyman. It's not that figure. That place gets an awful lot of grants and private support from a whole host of sources, and they've been very enterprising in being

Mr. Regula. And you supply other zoos?

Mr. Heyman. Pardon?

Mr. Regula. You supply other zoos with animals

Mr. Heyman. Yes.

Mr. Regula [continuing]. And you get compensated for that, I assume?

Mr. Heyman. Yes. It's really a shoestring operation down there.

Mr. Nethercutt. Okay, I wasn't sure what the net might be insofar as we are trying to explore ways to get you more money.

Mr. Heyman. Right.

SAFETY AT THE NATIONAL ZOOLOGICAL PARK

Mr. Nethercutt. One final question: in Philadelphia there was a tragic fire that killed some animals. Are you satisfied that there are adequate fire suppression, warning or protection systems in place at the National Zoo or other zoos that will avoid a repeat of that situation?

Mr. Heyman. I really would like Mike Robinson

Mr. Nethercutt. Sure.

Mr. Heyman [continuing]. He is the Director of the National Zoological Park, to deal with that.

Mr. Robinson. Yes, you can never—I'm 99 percent satisfied that that kind of thing can't happen at the Zoo, but our maintenance and restoration program is in the same state as the Smithsonian's is, except for the line item in the budget.

One of the items is a complete inspection and revision of our fire prevention facilities. The new buildings are all very up-to-date, and we have the great advantage that at night there is a Zoo police staff patrolling the whole establishment. The one time when a heater short-circuited in the Amazonia exhibit it was detected more or less instantly and caused no damage. But, you know, there is this situation where buildings that are old have the same problems that you've heard about from the Smithsonian's management.

Mr. Nethercutt. That's all I have at this moment, Mr. Chairman. I sjmipathize with you, and we struggle with all this. I think all of us are committed to the Smithsonian and to having a strong Institution maintained properly to be enjoyable for everybody in the Nation. It's just figuring out how to get from here to there, and it's a pleasure to see you're at least exploring the possibility of enhanced private contributions. And to the extent that we can help on that,

Mr. Yates. Why do you think he looks so haggard? [Laughter.]

Mr. Nethercutt. Pardon me? Why does he look so haggard? He looks stress-free compared to you and me and the chairman. [Laughter.]

Anjrway, thanks for your efforts. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Regula. The committee members will have questions to submit for the record.

Mr. Heyman. Yes, sir.

SMITHSONIAN'S NEW GENERAL COUNSEL

Mr. Yates. I want to meet Mr. Huerta.

Mr. Heyman. Oh, the new General Counsel of the Smithsonian Institution, John Huerta.

Mr. Yates. Hi, Mr. Huerta. I was just looking through your biography. I thought it was very, very good.

Mr. Huerta. It's a pleasure.

Mr, Heyman. You saw where he went to law school, didn't you?

Mr. Yates. I noticed that, yes. Even with that

[Laughter,]

Mr. Heyman. Boy, I asked for that one, didn't I?

Mr. Yates. I wanted to meet the replacement for Mr. Powers, whom I named "Judge" 20 years ago. I suppose we'll be naming Mr. Huerta the same, "Judge."

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

revenue generating activities

Mr. Regula. Can you generate any additional income from your concessions operations?

Mr. Heyman. Well, I hope that we're going to be able to come into you all with a report

Mr. Yates. I don't remember any of the museums where they're selling popcorn. [Laughter.]

Mr. Heyman. We're planning on doing some very considerable reorganization of how we carry on those businesses. And Connie Newman has just gotten a long report from Peat Marwick, and she's starting the consultation—we're all starting the consultation—with each of the museums. The directors would like a larger piece of the action, as you might imagine, and we're prepared to do that. We think that might enhance total receipts, especially in product development. So we're taking that awfully seriously.

CHOICES FOR THE FUTURE

Mr. Regula. I was interested in this report of the Commission on the Future of the Smithsonian Institution.

Mr. Heyman. Yes.

Mr. Regula. Again, I reiterate it's excellent and I think very pragmatic, and it says in there that the Smithsonian will not be able to do ever3rthing we all want to do and that it must "choose between established, even cherished activities and new programs." Now that's a pretty substantial statement, and I guess my question would be: are you looking and contemplating how you're going to meet those challenges?

Mr. Heyman. Well, yes, of course, we are, but what I've been relying on so far is that most of the museums get enough amounts of money, so that program cessations and efficiencies really can best be decided at that level. We are reviewing with directors where they can reduce expenditures.

Mr. Yates. One quick—Mr. Chairman

Mr. Regula. Yes, I'd yield.

CENTER FOR AFRICAN-AMERICAN HISTORY AND CULTURE

Mr. Yates. What happened to the African-American Museum? It's supposed to go into the Arts and History Building?

Mr. Heyman. Well, it's sort of—the program is an active program, but the museum

Mr. Yates. What does that mean?

Mr. Heyman. That means that it has traveling exhibitions that come from time to time, and the last one

Mr. Yates. Out of what, out of Anacostia?

Mr. Heyman. No, no, this was one from the High Museum in Atlanta

Mr. Yates. Yes.

Mr. Heyman [continuing]. On equal justice, which was a very good one. And

Mr. Yates. Where was it shown?

Mr. Heyman. In A&I, in the Arts and Industries Building. And it was added to by local artists, so it was enhanced in terms of a local perspective.

Mr. Yates. But is that now considered the base for the prospective African-American Museum?

Mr. Heyman. If one can get established, it would be established in relationship to the original plan, which would be in that building.

Mr. Yates. And how much would that cost?

Mr. Heyman. Oh, I don't—I can't remember any more.

Mr. Yates. It would be significant cost? By today's standards?

Mr. Heyman. Oh, by today's standards, any new venture of that sort would have a considerable cost related to it.

Mr. Yates. All right.

Mr. Heyman. But, from my perspective, what we're doing is we are maintaining the possibility of doing that when the funds are available. And what I mean by that is we have staff. We carry on some exhibitions, and because Anacostia and the project are now merged, the collection, the legality of collecting some artifacts through Anacostia is present. So should the fiscal circumstances change sometime in the future, it won't be rebuilding all of the steps that have gone on to the present.

Mr. Yates. Thank you.

Mr. Regula. Do you have any additional questions that you want to ask before we close?

Mr. Yates. I'll submit them for the record, Mr. Chairman.

Closing Remarks

Mr. Regula. Well, we're going to close because we have another hearing scheduled this afternoon.

Let me just say this: that I hope you'll go back on the assumption that we have a flat amount in 1997 in an allocation from our 602(b). Which means that, of course, we're probably going to have to be flat with every agency. On the assumption that we'd like to add to the $38 million, given the fact that R&R becomes a very important way of saving money for the future, we'd like you to go back and examine the priority choices that would have to be made under that scenario. When we know what we will have, we probably will want you to come back and respond on those circumstances. Now I know that's tough medicine, but, frankly, I don't have a lot of optimism that our allocation will increase in 1997 versus what we had in 1996 in this fiscal environment we're in. And we, therefore, in allocating among all the priorities that we have to serve on this subcommittee, will have a tough time taking from anywhere else.

Mr. Yates. We'll take it from forest roads, Ralph. [Laughter.]

Mr. Regula. Mr. Nethercutt has not come in with a second on that motion. [Laughter.]

We'll have some very difficult choices to make, and I know you've got—what?—built in about a 4 percent increase in your personnel costs because of inflation, mandated inflation, cost-of-living increases, and mandated step increases; is that correct?

Mr. Heyman. Right. That's right.

BUYOUT authority

Mr. Regula. So I notice you have not had many, if any, RIFs, and most of the agencies have, reductions in force, for our lay people. Will you be able to do that?

Mr. Heyman. Well, at the edges there obviously will be some. I would really like to avoid, if I possibly can, massive RIFs; I really would. And that's why I was so pleased, and I keep my fingers crossed, for the buyout authority and for the potential appropriation, because that will save us from having to do that.

Mr. Regula. Well, we'll try to protect the buyout in the CR that comes along here.

Mr. Heyman. That would be wonderful.

Mr. Regula. But the tradeoff is that we don't want those positions filled, and we want to have some flexibility as we contemplate what we're going to do in 1997 in terms of your budget.

Any further questions, discussion you want to add at this point?

Mr. Heyman. No, sir. I don't know if I look forward to, but I expect that—I'm very pleased that I'll be engaged in the next step of this.

[The statement of Mr. Heyman follows:]

TESTIMONY OF I. MICHAEL HEYMAN, SECRETARY

SMITHSO^nAN LNSTITUTION

before the

HOUSE APPROPRIATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERIOR

AND RELATED AGENCIES

APRIL 23, 1996

Good Morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee.

I am very pleased to be with you. This is a very exciting time at the Smithsonian. This year, 1996, we are celebrating our 150th anniversary and are working hard to make it a celebration to remember. The cornerstone of this anniversary has been the formation of the largest traveling show the Institution has ever attempted, called "America's Smithsonian." In it we showcase more than 300 of our Nation's most treasured artifacts - everything from Washington's sword and Lincoln's hat to the Apollo 14 space capsule. It is a wonderful celebration of the story that is America, and it is playing to awe-stnick crowds averaging more than 12,000 people a day.

We are very grateful to you, Mr. Chairman, for participating in the opening ceremonies in Los Angeles. We have since opened in Kansas City and will be visiting every region of the country over the next two years. And mindful of the challenge by the Congress and the President to "do more with less," this exhibition is being funded by donations from the private sector. Our corporate sponsors - MCI, Intel, Discover Card, and TWA - have been excellent partners in helping us achieve our goal of a "Smithsonian without walls" and in allowing us to bring the people's treasures to their home towns. The further collaboration of local organizations and our relationship with CBS, which is providing prime-time network broadcasts, have been invaluable to the tour's success.

On August 10, the anniversary date of the enactment of the statute that created the Smithsonian Institution, we will throw a national birthday party on the Mall. Stretching from the Capitol to the Washington Monument, each museum will host outside displays, and we will provide entertainment and foods from across America. Fireworks will culminate the evening's festivities. If any Members of the Subcommittee are in town, we hope you and your families will be our guests at what promises to be a wonderful event.

This excitement is touching every person and every sector of the Institution. I believe that if we are to continue to be relevant into the next century, we must seek to broaden the diffusion of knowledge far beyond the Mall. I am pleased to report that we have made significant strides in addition to "American's Smithsonian" since we met last year toward creating a "Smithsonian without walls." We have gone "online" and are now among the most "visited" sites on the Internet. Since last May, our HomePage has logged more than 35 million hits and is now recording approximately 125,000 hits per day, substantially more than its initial average of 30,000. Not only has this made exhibitions and artifacts in our

-2-

museums available to school children across America, but large portions of our research collection are also available to scholars and to industry over phone Unes.

In addition, just last month the National Museum of Natural History op>ened its "electronic classroom," which will allow curators and experts at Natural History, as well as at the Zoo and the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center, to be electronically linked with classrooms in Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, and soon in Ohio. This program has been a true partnership with NASA's Stennis Space Center, Mississippi State University, and the Naval Meteorological and Oceanographic Command. I look forward to expanding this effort to other museums and schools across America.

Finally, we have increased our efforts in traveling exhibitions through the Smithsonian Traveling Exhibition Service, most notably with the Art Train, and through loans of objects and specimens to museums and researchers across the land. In 1994, more than 2,000 loans were initiated that encompassed more than 171,000 objects, an increase of nearly six percent over the loans made in the previous year. Increasing loans to facilities that can ensure the protection, security, and display of the artifacts is an excellent way to accomplish two objectives: improve public access outside of Washington and reduce the stress on storage space.

Mr. Chairman, just as we must take bold steps to improve our mission of diffusing knowledge, so must we also continue to sharpen our capabilities for world class research in order to achieve our other objective: the inrrMse. of the body of knowledge. Our capabilities for doing so are increasing at both the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory and the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute by bringing on-line the submillimeter telescope array in Hawaii and in securing another privately-donated crane for research on the canopy of the tropical forest where the rich diversity of life and functions of plants offer new opportunities for study.

I would like to take just a moment to highlight a few of the advances in 199S in which Smithsonian researchers were critical. Scientists at the National Museum of Natural History identified, through the study of the Museum's voucher specimens, a relative of the Pacific yew tree that has been used to produce taxol, a powerful drug in fighting ovarian and breast cancer. The relative, the European yew, has a much higher concentration of taxol that allows the drug to be harvested without having to destroy the tree, as was required with the Pacific yew.

In 1995, our scientists also became involved with Department of Defense entomologists who are using our collections to identify more than 15,000 insects out of 36,000 gathered in an attempt to find the disease vector of the deadly Ebola vims. The vector remains unknown, and their work continues.

-3-

I believe it is important to note these examples because although less than 2 % of our collections are on display at any one time, we should never forget that all of the collections are available for public service, even if not displayed. Of our 140 million objects, more than 120 million are at the National Museum of Natural History. The bulk of these collections are used in basic and applied research by both private and public scientists. Each year, for example, scientists from USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, the Agricultural Research Service, and the Forest Service, as well as the Defense Department use our collections to identify more than 100,000 insects. Customs and Agriculture inspectors at ports-of-entry rely, in many cases, on those collections to identify insects on arriving perishable fruit crops that must be either banned or moved to market quickly by sending an example to scientists at Natural History. And for the first time. Natural History has signed an agreement with a private sector partner that will fund botanical collection expeditions in the hopes of discovering new cures for diseases.

Also, in 1995, the Smithsonian hosted more than 600 interns from 45 states. They are involved at every level - from exhibition design to field research - and are as critical to us for their contributions of labor and creativity as are the more than 5,000 volunteers who help us run the Institution each year.

Mr. Chairman, you have been kind enough to describe us as a "Must-do" agency. I could not agree with you more. I also recognize that this means that we have a responsibility to be a "Can-do" agency. I appreciate the help that this Subcommittee has provided in accomplishing vital objectives, most notably, increasing our repair and restoration"account to handle our aging facilities, particularly in light of the fiscal constraints within which the Subcommittee has had to operate.

After receiving your approval, we implemented a major reorganization of senior management at the Institution. Since our last meeting. Dr. Dennis O'Connor has become Provost to oversee programmatic activities in the arts and humanities, sciences, and public service. In establishing this position, we eliminated three assistant secretary and two deputy assistant secretary positions and brought museum and research support functions under a singular senior officer. By starting at the top and reducing layers of administrative staff and support costs, I am signaling to others in the Institution that efficiency and economy are guideposts for restructuring our entire effort.

With the Government-wide buy-out authority, we eliminated 208 positions and achieved a savings of more than $9.5 million. If additional buy-out authority becomes available, we anticipate eliminating another 200 positions through a voluntary separation program.

For such "right sizing" to be effective, we must nurture what remains because in many cases we will be asking those dedicated people to do more to accomplish our mission. It is critical that we be able to provide those who remain with pay and health benefits increases and other incentives. I hope to work with the Subcommittee and staff to preserve the savings derived from buyouts to offset our need to meet mandatory costs.

I am commined to seeking and securing additional revenues in the private sector to aid in enhancing our mission. But as you are well aware, it is nearly impossible to raise private dollars to pay for operational expenses. That is why your help in securing these costs is so critical.

For Fiscal Year 1997. we are seeking $383.7 million for the Institution's operating and capital accounts, an increase of $10.6 million over the FY 1996 conference level. Of this amount, $328.7 is for Salaries and Expenses, including approximately $18 million for mandatory cost increases. Also included is a request for $38 million for repair and restoration of buildings; $4 million for construction and improvements at the National Zoo and $13 million for general construction.

Mr. Chairman, three challenges that face us in the coming years are: 1) protecting and displaying our collections; 2) providing for the upkeep of our facilities; and 3) streamlining the Institution.

We have begun the process of streamlining. My next objective is to retain the extraordinary talent and experience found among our staff, while also increasing our ability to attract new talent in areas where it is needed. I am currently working with the Office of Personnel Management to develop a pilot project to increase management flexibility, provide for employee advancement, and allow for the creation of a unitary personnel system for the Smithsonian.

Finally, as to our other challenges, I would like to ask Richard Rice, Senior Facilities Services Officer, to brief you on our plans for repair and renovation of existing facilities, as well as on our plans to bring on line two new facilities that will protect our artifacts through improved storage capabilities and greatly increase their accessibility to the public.

Mr. Regula. The committee's adjourned until 1:30 this afternoon.

[The information follows:]

ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

Priorities

Question 1: Your budget consists of increases of $20.5 million in operations ($2.4 million program increases), $750,000 for Zoo construction ($600,000 program increase), $4 million for the Repair and Restoration account and $9 million for both the new American Indian mall museum and the new Air and Space Extension at Dulles Airport. This Committee fully expects a lower allocation than the current year's. With this in mind, can you prioritize these increases and offer offsets within existing accounts for your two highest priorities?

Answer: The Smithsonian's total requested increase for FY 1997 is less than $11 million and less than 3 % of funds available in FY 1996. Nearly 90% of its requested increase in the Salaries and Expenses account is for mandatory costs of pay for the staff that operates programs serving millions of visitors to the Mall and people in other parts of the country, as well as those who reach the Institution electronically. This basic level of activity stimulates resources in the private sector, most amply demonstrated in this sesquicentennial year by funding for America's Smithsonian, the traveling exhibition that is taking the Institution to cities in all comers of the country, and a number of other television, publication, and scholarly programs that help to remind the Nation of its heritage and bring together its people.

The small increase requested in the Repair and Restoration account is consistent with the recommendation of the Commission on the Future of the Smithsonian Institution, with the action of this Committee to accelerate work on the deteriorating buildings that house Institutional collections and activities, and with the responsibility of the Institution to safeguard the assets—the buildings and the coUections-with which it has been entrusted.

The Construction request is less than half of that for FY 1996. Its prime components are planning funds for the Mall museum building of the National Museum of the American Indian and for the National Air and Space Museum Center at Dulles International Airport, both of which represent fulfillment of statutory obligations and both of which are leveraging major increments of funding in the non-Federal sector in order to protect and display two unparalleled collections.

All of the components of the very modest over-all increase that has been requested in the FY 1997 budget are designed to stabilize the essential infrastructure of the Smithsonian in order to attract partners-individuals, corporations, and other levels of govemment-to support a lively range of public programs without additional burdens on limited Federal resources.

Our highest priorities are to meet mandatory increases and to fulfill Institutional obligations. Off-sets in other areas of such magnitude would require elimination of programs and activities that would diminish the capacity for public service by the Institution.

Mandatory Increases

Question 2: Your budget request includes a $20.5 million increase for salaries and expenses. Of that $18.3 million is directly associated with fixed costs. Are these costs all associated with fiscal year 1997 increases or are there costs from fiscal year 1996 included?

Answer: Of the $18.3 million requested to cover mandatory increases, $2,627,000 is required for the cost of FY 1995 locality pay and $1,079,000 to annualize the FY 1995 pay raise. In addition, $5,337,000 is required for the costs of the FY 1996 pay raises. Of the remainder, $6,014,000 is for pay proposed for FY 1997 and related costs, while $3,276,000 is for FY 1997 costs associated with utilities, communications, postage, and rent.

Question 3: The budget includes an increase of $1.2 million for central rental costs. Assuming certain conditions are met, the Woodrow Wilson Center might be moving to a new building downtown. They claim that by vacating their current space in the Castle the Smithsonian should save up to $700,000 in current rented space that would no longer be needed. Is this an accurate statement?

Answer: If the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars (WWICS) space were used entirely to house Smithsonian staff currently in leased space, the Smithsonian could potentially save up to $750,000 in armual rent costs. However, the major systems in the Smithsonian Castle building are in serious need of replacement. The work, planned in the Repair and Restoration of Buildings (R&R) account, will require the phased relocation of staff now in the Castle out of the construction zone. The project will take several years to complete. The Institution plans to use the space now occupied by the WWICS as "swing space" to house temporarily the staff dislocated by the R&R project. At the end of the construction period, the Smithsonian will look at various options for permanently relocating staff from leased space, as well as consolidating staff now occupying space in the Mall museums.

Submillimeter Telescope Array

Question 4: There is a request for additional program funding in the amount of $2.4 million. Of this amount $720,000 is for the operation of the submillimeter telescope array in Hawaii. What would be the consequence of not funding this item in fiscal year 1997?

Answer: The first astronomical tests of the submillimeter telescope array are scheduled to take place at Haystack Observatory in Massachusetts in January 1997, followed by a limited observing schedule. The equipment will then be shipped to Hilo, Hawaii, the location of the base camp, and finally to the mountain top on Mauna Kea where the array is being assembled. The location in Hilo is essential because staff cannot work continuously in the thin atmosphere at the summit. The funds sought will cover the cost of operating these sites, and include supplies and utilities. Without these funds the schedule of checkout and commissioning of the

submillimeter array would be seriously delayed and would result in significantly higher overall project cost.

Questions: Can this amount be phased?

Answer: The requested amount represents the next step in the phased transition to the operation of the array. The impact of delays is described in the answer to Question 4 above.

National Museum of the American Indian Operations

Question 6: Over the past several years the Federal investment in the three National Museum of the American Indian (NMAI) facilities has grown to approximately $63 million plus operating costs. The projected Federal investment in the Mall museum over the next three years is projected to be another $78 million and by the year 2000, the annual operating costs for all three facilities will be $40 million.

I mention this because most of your operating request for an additional $600,000 and 7 new FTEs is for e.nhancements such as increasing public programs, new exhibit planning, outreach and training. While these may be worthwhile programs, given the fact that this committee's allocation will most likely be below the 96 level is it possible to either delay, phase or raise private dollars for these activities?

Answer: Three of the positions and $182,000 of the funds requested for 1997 will be used to enhance visitor services at the Heye Center in New York. Two of these positions will be used to provide instruction and guidance directly to museum visitors and the third will provide assistance in exhibition preparation and maintenance now that our public exhibit program has begun. Delay or phasing of these added resources would mean that museum visits would be less meaningful than we would like for a significant number of people, especially school groups. The interpretive and exhibits maintenance staff requested are sorely needed now to meet public demands.

Four of the positions and $328,000 requested will be used to establish a community .services office as an organizational component of the museum in order to:

• provide Native American collaboration for Mall Museum programs and exhibits;

• provide access to NMAI collections for tribes and organizations located in isolated areas beyond the east coast site of NMAI's physical facilities;

• provide impetus for collaborative funding of programs and the raising of nonfederal dollars for programmatic activities;

• provide Native American perspectives on their history and contemporary life to

Museum visitors.

Again, delay or phasing of these services would slow the NMAI in its mission of advancing knowledge and understanding of Native cultures and providing cultural information on tribal artifacts to Native people.

Seeking private dollars to supplement operational costs is an option the Museum will always try to use. Once staff is established and construction completed, fund raising for programmatic efforts can complement and expand established activities.

National Museum of Natural History East Court

Question 7: An additional $1.1 million and 6 tits are requested for the National Museum of Natural History East Court project. Can you prioritize this request?

Answer: Priority 1: This request includes 6 FTEs and $426,000 to provide a portion of the facility management expenses, including custodians and engineer system repair positions and operational supplies and contracts such as elevator maintenance, necessary to clean and maintain this new building. Additional facility management staff and other costs associated with occupying and maintaining the building will be requested in future budgets.

Priority 2: Funding in the amount of $649,000 will be used to procure the telephones and a portion of the data system for the building's communications network. The timely -occupancy of the new building and the provision of relocation space for the uninterrupted > progress of the total heating and air conditioning replacement in the existing building (Major Capital Renewal Program) are dependent on the prompt installation of these communications systems. Funding in FY 1997 is vital so that these systems can be contracted for in advance of construction completion and installed as soon as the building is finished. The remainder of the data system will be procured as early as possible in FY 1998.

Construction and Improvements, National Zoological Park

Question 8: The fiscal year 1996 Conference agreement recommends that construction funds for the National Zoological Park, including Front Royal, be limited to repairs and rehabilitation not for new exhibits or expansions. The fiscal year 1997 budget recommends an additional $750,000. What is the current backlog of maintenance repairs needed at both facilities?

Answer: The current backlog of maintenance repairs needed at both facilities is approximately $19 million.

Question 9: What will the additional $750,000 be used for? Please be project specific.

Answer: The additional $750,000 will be used to replace failing mechanical and electrical equipment and upgrade fire protection systems at both facilities. FY 1997 Zoo R&R projects include replacing the failing water treatment system at Beaver Valley; increasing electric service to the Bird House and outside exhibits that are insufficient for winter heating loads; replacing the emergency generator at the Bird House, which has exceeded its useful life; replacing failing walls and leaking roofs at the Deer Area; replacing winter storm damage at the Conservation Research Center buildings, including re-building several old structures that collapsed from the excessive snow; renovating the Mane Restaurant's heating, ventilation, and air conditioning system and repairing the restaurant's roof, exterior skin, and windows.

Question 10: Over $3 million has been appropriated to date for the new Grasslands exhibits. This budget requests $600,000 to complete Phase I, the Panda Plaza and Bison Grasslands area. What would be the consequence of not completing this phase of the project? Is there any usable space available now as a result of the $3 million?

Answer: The consequence of not funding the $600,000 for completion of Phase I would be elimination of construction work necessary to bring the Plaza area into compliance with accessibility requirements for wheelchairs and handicapped visitors. Additionally, increasing the Plaza area to accommodate large crowds would not be possible, and the educational component of the Grasslands Map would be eliminated.

There is no usable space as of now, but construction of the Phase I site is scheduled to begin July 1996. During construction, the animals that will fill the Phase I exhibit will continue to be housed in substandard facilities until its completion.

Question 11: What specific projects did the $3 million fund?

Answer: Existing funds are being used as follows:

Design for Phases I-ffl $ 953,000

Construction for Phase I only $2,326,000

Phase I includes the "American Prairies" exhibit with bison, prairie dogs, the garden of medicinal plants, and rest rooms.

Question 12: Is the planning and design work completed for all three grassland habitats?

Answer: Planning and design are complete for Phase I and design development is complete for Phase n. Further work on Phase HI is on hold, pending funding and budget decisions.

Question 13: What are the total construction and operations costs associated with the completed Grassland exhibits?

Answer: The total construction and operations costs associated with each phase are as follows:

Phase rnnsfmrtion Rstimatp. Operations Tosts

Phase I - American Prairie $2,926,000 No increase

Phase n - Domestication Area* $1,700,000 No increase

Phase m - African Savannah $4,000,000 Not fiiUy determined

* If the Farm option is included in the Domestication Area, the additional construction costs of $1.2 million and operating costs will be funded with non-Federal funds.

Question 14: The budget contains $3.4 million for both the Rock Creek and Front Royal facilities. Are all these projects repairs and basic maintenance as opposed to new projects or facilities? Please be project specific.

Answer: All projects included in the $3.4 million are for repair and basic maintenance of the facilities and exhibits, as opposed to new projects or facilities. Projects will be selected from the following list of R&R projects that reflects requirements for FY 1997. Items not funded in FY 1997 will be added to Zoo R&R requirements programmed for fiiture years.

\

s

e

o

1 s

rs 8 11:

|S 1

f ?

o

1

?

a 5

" o

it

IS

M

i«

Sm

1 7 5 •

'I Sa

\HI

S -o "

'111

Si I 3 o 3

f t

flD I S

&9

8 §

i

s

S 1

'til

15 ol

||l 11 It

I I

S I

s i

1^

^1

8

8

> p

!i

a Q.

€) 3

S u

= i

— 3

- O -^

- ■= I

■5 — —

- E I

« O £

f I'S

las-S « g

111

II

is

II

S i

o o

el

3 ^

s S ?

S E

3 -S

5-

SI

c o

Is

if ?r

If

i!

« —

8&

5 S

8

8 8

Repair and Restoration of Buildings

Question 15: The budget request for Repair and Restoration of Buildings is $38 million, $4 million above the fiscal year 1996 level. The recent report by the Smithsonian's Commission on the Future of the Institution recommended a $50 million a year level in order to deal with the $250 million backlog of critical maintenance needs among the various museum buildings. Did OMB cut this request back to $38 million?

Answer: The Smithsonian requested the full $50 million in its FY 1997 budget submission to OMB. In its fmal passback OMB allowed $38 million.

Question 16: The report indicates that unless serious attention is paid to this problem, many of the larger, more popular museum facilities would surely be forced to close to the public. With this real threat in mind, how can the Smithsonian justify spending another $80 million for the third Museum of the American Indian at this time?

Answer: Like many organizations, the Smithsonian must address multiple obligations and competing priorities. Maintenance, repair, and restoration of the historic public buildings that it occupies is high among these, as is the fulfillment of obligations it has undertaken with the express authority of the Congress to preserve and inteipret the national collections. The third structure for the National Museum of the American Indian-the Museum building on the Mall-represents completion of the facilities program outlined in P.L.I01-185 and designed to house and display the comprehensive and irreplaceable collections of that museum. Fundraising for one-third of the estimated $110 million cost of construction is almost completed. As has been done with design funds from both Federal and non-Federal sources, it is expected that both kinds of funding will be applied in phases to construction of the Museum, expected to be opened to the public in 2002.

Question 17: The breakdown of how the $38 million will be spent includes several categories including Major Capital Renewal which is only allotted $9 million. How much of the $38 million is going specifically to the most seriously impaired museums vs routine maintenance and repair?

Answer: All of the funding included in the Major Capital Renewal is planned for the buildings in the most serious condition: $6 million for the Natural History Museum, $1 million for the American Art and Portrait Gallery, and $2 million for the Smithsonian "Castle." In addition, another $4 to $5 million reflected in the other categories is planned for urgent work in the Natural History Museum and the American Art and Portrait Gallery building.

Question 18. The budget mentions four buildings; which museums are you referring to in the budget?

Answer: The four buildings whose poor conditions concern us most are the National Museum of Natural History, the American Art and Portrait Gallery Building (also known as the Patent Office Building), the Arts and Industries Building, and the Smithsonian Institution "Castle" Building.

Question 19: Can you supply for the record a list in priority order of the most seriously impaired buildings and the costs associated with each?

Answer: Beginning with the building in the most critical condition, the four buildings are listed in order of urgency of renewal, with the current estimated cost of repairing identified deficiencies:

Estimated Deficiencies (SMillinns)

National Museum of Natural History 110

American Art and Portrait Gallery Building 42

Arts and Industries Building 22

Smithsonian Institution 'Castle' Building 33

Question 20: How will the $33.9 million appropriated by this committee for fiscal year 1996 be used?

Answer: The funding appropriated for FY 1996 will be used as follows:

Category SQQQs

Major Capital Renewal $7,000

General Repairs 5,770

Facade, Roof and Terrace Repairs 9,885

Fire Detection and Suppression 825

Access, Safety and Security 5,270

Utility System Repairs 3,510

Advanced Planning and Inspection 1,694

Total $33,954

National Museum of the American Indian, Mall Museum

Question 21: The construction budget contains $4 million to complete the planning and design work for the National Museum of the American Indian Mall building. The conference report for fiscal year 1996 clearly states that "the Smithsonian is to develop alternative cost scenarios for the proposed mall museum which should include downsizing of the building and a decrease in the amount of Federal funding." Is the Smithsonian developing this information?

Answer: The National Museum of the American Indian's Mall building plans have been scrutinized to assure that the building's capacities most efficiently meet expected public demand and design standards suitable to the location. Consequently, the building will occupy only 24% of the site, considerably less than the National Gallery's East Wing on the comparable site across the Mall. NMAI's 250,000 square feet would be 26% smaller in area than the National Gallery's 340,000 square foot East Wing. In fact, the ratio of square feet of public area to expected visitor levels for the NMAI Mall Museum will be the lowest of any museum on the Mall. Given our experience in accommodating the needs of visitors to the Mall and the well-known public enthusiasm for newer and highly popular museums, such as the Holocaust Museum and the Gallery's East Wing, we believe the building cannot be downsized further. The Institution's recommendation is to continue to maximize public space allocations within the already pared back plan, keeping within the original $110 million estimate. In view of our responsibilities to the public and the particular design requirements for building on that highly visible site, we believe the most appropriate option is to keep the present space configuration and budget.

Question 22: The 1997 budget lays out a construction schedule for the NMAI mall museum and recommends $32 million in fiscal year 1998, $26 million in fiscal year 1999 and $6 million in the year 2000. This is the original plan that calls for a $80 million Federal contribution to this $110 million project. It would appear that the Smithsonian has not attempted to restructure this project in an effort to raise more non-federal dollars as directed by the conference report for fiscal year 1996. Is this accurate?

Answer: Nearly all of the Smithsonian's original commitment of $37 million is pledged or in hand following four years of broad and careful cultivation of potential donors. Despite considerable effort to attract foundation and corporate support, most of the funding has come from individuals. Restructuring the fund-raising goal at this time would require lengthy 'front end' efforts to identify new prospects and would delay the project, resulting in increased construction costs. This project is a highly visible public/private partnership by the Smithsonian, and donors have made commitments relying on the Congressionally-approved Federal match. We fear that any restructuring may breech trust with existing donors and damage prospects for ongoing and future public/private partnerships.

Question 23: Because of a reduced federal allocation, is it not more critical to address the $250 million backlog of serious maintenance, which by your own admission threatens the closure of museums first before constructing two brand new facilities?

Answer: As complex as the Smithsonian may appear, it has in reality only three components-staff, collections, and facilities-with which to fulfill its mandate "for the increase and diffusion of knowledge."

The knowledge that is increased and diffused is derived primarily from the Smithsonian's unique and varied collections that are housed in the facilities of the Institutions,

some of which are museums. The first line of defense in preserving collections is proper environments. The most basic of these provides shelter from the elements; the most sophisticated offers controlled tolerances of temperature, humidity, light, and particulate. The physical integrity of structures is the most effective means of addressing the former, while modem internal systems are the foundation for the latter. Most Smithsonian collections require tightly-controlled systems, but all must be housed in sound buildings that have good mechanical systems. At present, some are not.

Reducing the maintenance backlog is central to assuring that Smithsonian collections are secure, as well as accessible to the public and to the scholarly community. At the same time, large parts of certain collections, such as those of the National Museum of the American Indian (NMAI) and the National Air and Space Museum (NASM) are housed in buildings of such inadequacy or in places so isolated as to make large parts of the collections not only inaccessible, but unusable by those from whose cultures they are derived and by specialists in the disciplines they represent.

In the case of NMAI, the Subcommittee has provided a solution for a substantial portion of the collection that assures its preservation. However, in order to complete that task, as well as to meet the commitments assumed in the authorizing legislation, designed in part to make the NMAI collection fiilly accessible, its Mall museum building must be completed.

In the case of NASM, the Air and Space building on the Mall houses some of the key objects of aviation and space flight, but its full history catmot be told because large objects are stored in remote areas at Dulles or in Arizona, and the remainder of the collection is poorly housed in leaky World War n Quonset-type buildings in Maryland, to which access must be limited for reasons of safety. Construction of the extension will improve exponentially the public's accessibility to the collections, open extraordinary new opportunities for sharing knowledge through exhibition and public education, and assure the preservation of the objects that have so defined America's technology and culture in the 20th century.

Question 24: Over the last several years nearly $55 million federal construction dollars plus $26 million in additional operating costs have been appropriated specifically for the Custom House and Suitland NMAI facilities. Clearly the federal government has demonstrated a strong commitment to this collection.

But, given the shrinking federal allocation for this subcommittee can you give this committee a compelling reason why critical health and safety, maintenance, and other backlog needs of the existing Smithsonian facilities should be deferred in order to construct a new $110 million facility at this time?

Answer: The commitment of the Federal Government to all Smithsonian collections has been consistently demonstrated by authorizations providing for their acquisition, by appropriations for new or improved facilities in which to house them, and by funding for their care and conservation. Approval of funds sought in the current request for health and safety.

maintenance, and other backlog needs of Institutional facilities will be a further manifestation of a commitment that cannot be deferred if those collections are to be preserved adequately for this and future generations of Americans.

Congressional approval of authority for the Smithsonian to acquire the collection that is the basis of the National Museum of the American Indian (NMAI) was grounded in the incomparability of that collection and its imperilled condition. Additional provisions in P.L. 101-185, which granted acquisition authority, recognized that new construction would be required in order to sustain the collection and made it widely available to the public.

The Institution would be remiss in its commitment to preserve the NMAI collection if it did not seek funding for the purposes outlined in the authorizing legislation. In keeping with the concept of partnerships for construction of NMAI facilities that was established in the original Act, the Smithsonian will complement the $4,000,000 requested with $3.4 million in non-appropriated funds so that design of the NMAI's Mall museum building can be completed.

Of the total of $110 million estimated for construction, the Institution expects to seek appropriated funding of S73.3, or two-thirds of its cost, of which $5.3 million has been appropriated to date. Assuming approval of the current request for $4,000,000, the balance of $64 million will be sought in increments over three years beginning in Fiscal Year 1998.

The remaining one-third of the cost of construction ($36.7 million) is being sought in the private sector. Approximately $32 million is in hand, and has been raised to a major extent on the basis -of the partnership with the Federal Government.

Question 25: Should additional dollars not be available to this subcommittee because of a reduced allocation for fiscal year 1997, in which existing budgets within the Institution would you recommend we find the money to fund this new facility?

Answer: Funding for design of the National Museum of the American Indian building on the Mall cannot be identified elsewhere in the Smithsonian's FY 1997 budget request. The Smithsonian engages in a nearly-year-long process to examine its needs and priorities in the light of existing fiscal realities before submitting its budget request to Congress. The components that constitute what becomes a single appropriation are carefully honed and distinct from each other. In addition, they serve specific purposes that, while related, are not inter-changeable, and do not lend themselves to shifts of funds from one another.

The total request of the Institution for FY 1997 is only $10.6 million more than its FY 1996 appropriation. The increase of $20.3 million in the Salaries and Expenses (S&E) Account is, except for a very modest $2 million in essential program enhancements, requested to meet the costs of mandatory pay, utilities, and rent. S&E provides fiinds for the Institution's basic operating infrastructure. Failure to provide for these mandatory expenses directly impacts services to the public because they are costs that must be paid. A domino effect sets in: reducing the programs that define the Institution and attract visitors reduces

non-appropriated income from visitor services, such as shop and restaurant revenue, as well as donations. Income from these sources complements appropriated funding and supports higher levels of public activity, particularly in exhibitions and education.

The FY 1996 appropriation provided a crucial level of improvement to the Repair and Restoration of Buildings Account (R&R), and approval of the $38,000,000 requested for FY 1997 is critical to fmally allowing the Institution to make inroads on the backlog of needed work on its historic buildings in order to properly house its collections and provide for the health and safety of its visitors and staff.

The Zoo construction account includes $600,000 to complete Phase I of the Grasslands exhibit. It also includes funds totaling $3.4 million for repairs and improvements to the roadways, facilities, and building systems at both Rock Creek and Front Royal.

In addition to the $4,000,000 for NMAI design in the Construction account, that account also includes $4,000,000 for alterations and modifications that will address a series of programmatic needs of other Smithsonian museums and research institutes and a request for $5,000,000 for design of the Air and Space Museum Extension at Dulles. Like the NMAI, the NASM Extension is a Congres«ionally-authorized partnership designed to mitigate the large amounts of Federal funding that otherwise would be required to protect unique collections by leveraging funding in the non-Federal sector. Approval of that request is central to continuing the commitments made by the Commonwealth of Virginia for the project.

National Air and Space Museum Dulles Center

Question 26: The budget recommends $5 million to continue the planning and design work for the Air and Space Museum Extension near Dulles Airport in Virginia. The Conference report for the current fiscal year directed that the $1 million provided should be used to complete a master plan and initiate detailed planning and design to allow for the development of a proposed financial plan for the extension. The management plan should include the detailed phasing of the project and commitments by the Commonwealth of Virginia and the Smithsonian toward construction and operation of the facility. What is the status of this plan?

Answer: The FY 1996 funding to support the completion of the master plan and the schematic design phase of the Extension project was only recently made available with the passage of the FY 1996 Omnibus Appropriations bill in April 1996. It is projected that the final draft of the master plan will be submitted to the Smithsonian Board of Regents in late 1996; the contract for schematic design will be let before the end of the current fiscal year. This work, along with fund-raising analyses already under way, will provide the level of detail necessary to craft a sound financial plan for the construction and operation of the new facility at IXilles. An initial report on financial planning will be submitted to the Regents for their review in 1997.

24-697 96-34

Question 27: Does the Smithsonian have firm legal and binding commitments from the Commonwealth of Virginia and the private sector interests about fuiancing the construction and operations of this facility?

Answer: A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Smithsonian and the Commonwealth of Virginia has been signed by Secretary Heyman and Governor Allen. The MOU, dated April 22, 1996, calls for the Institution, in consultation with Virginia, to prepare a budget and plan of financing. In the agreement, Virginia commits to provide S6 million in appropriated funds for construction, specific access, site work, and infrastructure items valued at approximately $40 million, bonding authority up to $100 million, and a $3 million interest-free short-tenn loan. Virginia will also provide assistance to the Smithsonian with its fund-raising campaign, working with business groups and non-profits operating in the Commonwealth. An analysis of fund-raising potential to support the Dulles project is already under way.

Recr;ganization and Restructuring

Question 28: What is the current status of your reorganization and restructuring plans?

Answer: The Institution began a series of reorganizations and restructurings in 1992. In that year organizations were realigned and consolidated in order to strengthen and mobilize resources and to eliminate artificial boundaries between units that did not make functional or fiscal sense. In 1993, the Institution reallocated resources within and between organizational units based on changed priorities and critical needs for funding. In 1994, some 206 positions were eliminated through a Voluntary Separation Incentive Program in order to meet continued constraints mandated by budgetary and personnel ceilings. In 1995, his first year in office, the new Secretary implemented a reorganization of central administration which eliminated a layer of senior management and redistributed resources to fill critical needs in the program units. Finally, in 1996 the Institution is continuing to delayer levels of management and will implement a second Voluntary Separation Incentive Program in order to meet reductions in Federal personnel levels.

Question 29: What savings are associated with this downsizing effort to date?

Answer: As a part of the Voluntary Separation Incentive Program conducted in 1994, the Institution reduced its budget by almost $10 million over a two year period. In addition, the Institution has decreased its FTE ceiling by 227 positions.

Question 30: How have those savings been used?

Answer: As stated in the answer to question 29, the Institution reduced its budget by almost $10 million in FY 1995 and FY 1996 as a result of the FY 1994 Voluntary Separation Incentive Program. The savings were withdrawn through the appropriation process.

Question 31: Can you provide for the record the levels of FTE's for the past five fiscal years including this fiscal year 1997 budget?

Answer: The authorized FTE ceilings for the Smithsonian for the past five years, as issued by the Office of Management and Budget, are as follows:

FTP. Change

Question 32: What FTE level are you required to meet by 1999 under the President's Executive Order to reduce the federal workforce and how do you intend to meet that target?

Answer: The Institution is required to meet an FTE level of 4,303 by 1999. This reduction, a decrease of 234 FTE over the FY 1997 request, will be achieved through the use of the FY 1996 Voluntary Separation Incentive Program (buyouts), hiring freezes, attrition, and reductions in force, as necessary.

Voluntary Donations

Question 33: The Smithsonian has experimented over the past several years with voluntary visitor collections, the concept of admission fees for certain facilities and museum shops similar to the very successful efforts at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City. What is the status of these efforts?

Answer: Under a climate of fiscal austerity and as a means for testing whether the public's willingness to donate was substantial, the Institution implemented a voluntary donations demonstration project. The initial period of the demonstration was April 1 to October 31, 1993, and included the National Air and Space Museum, the National Museum of American Art, the National Portrait Gallery, the National Zoological Park, and the Anacostia Museum.

Although October 31, 1993 was the scheduled end-point for the demonstration period, the donation boxes currently remain in the test facilities. After rather unsuccessful results in

terms of the amounts collected, a decision was made to redesign the boxes to make them more attractive, as well as to move them to more prominent points within the museums. The result was an increase in voluntary contributions. Nevertheless, the improvements did not yield substantial amounts. In the three years since April 1, 1993 we have raised approximately

$99,000.

This past year the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on the Department of the Interior and Related Agencies requested that the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution report on the feasibility and cost effectiveness of admissions fees by June I, 1996. The Subcommittee indicated that, as part of the effort, the Institution should consider 1) the feasibility of a program that involves weekly and annual passes and 2) pricing strategies that would be reasonable, yet responsive, to the variety of Smithsonian visitors. The Board of Regents took up this subject at its May meeting and will forward its report to the Senate by June 1.

Buyout Authority

Question 34: The Committee has included new buy out authority for the Smithsonian in the current Continuing Resolution. Should this be signed into law by the President, can you project how many individuals will take advantage of this opportunity?

Answer: It is currently projected that approximately 130 people will participate in the Voluntary Sq}aration Incentive Program authorized in the Institution's FY 1996 sq^propriation.

Question 35: What are the savings associated with these buyouts? How will the savings be utilized?

Answer: Savings associated with the incentive program are estimated at $6.5 million. These resources will be applied by the Smithsonian museums and research institutes to continue their basic operations, defray unfunded inflation and mandatory pay and utility costs, and to high-priority needs of collections, exhibitions, research, and education activities.

Question 36: Will these positions be eliminated?

Answer: The positions vacated by those who accept voluntary separation incentives will in most cases be eliminated. In a few cases, when continuation of a function is essential, the position may be filled at a lower pay grade.

Barney Studio House

Question 37: At last year's hearing Secretary Heyman was discussing the Smithsonian's strategic planning process. As one of the examples of downsizing, he mentioned that the Regents had given their approval to dispose of the Barney Studio House. What is the current status of this plan?

Answer: The Institution is continuing its efforts to sell the property. While there is still considerable interest on the part of potential buyers, the Institution has not yet received an offer.

The Institution has been consulting with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation about the sale of the property. When the Advisory Council's final comments, which are expected in June, are received, the Institution can proceed with disposal of the property.

Traveling Exhibitions

Question 38: Can you provide for the record the activities of the traveling exhibitions this past year?

Answer: The record for the last year follows:

Smithsonian Institution Traveling Exhibition Service Record of Activities: April 1995 - April 1996

Jan. 7 - April 7, 1995

Chicago, IL

Field Museum of Natural History

Strength and Diversity: Japanese-American Women, 1885-1990

March 3 - April 30, 1995

Astoria, OR

Clatsop Historical Society

Produce for Victory: Posters on the American Home Front, 1941-1945

March 4-April 1, 1995

Lewisburg, WV

Carnegie Hall

Produce for Victory: Posters on the American Home Front, 1941-1945

March 4 - April 16, 1995 Paterson, NJ Paterson Museum Songs of My People

March 4 - April 30, 1995

Knoxville. TN

Museum of East Temiessee History

Before Freedom Came: African American Life in the Antebellum South

March 11 - April 9, 1995

Choctaw, MS

Choctaw Museum of the Southern Indian

Saynday Was Coming Along: Silverhom's Drawings of the Kiowa Trickster

March 11 - April 23, 1995

Janesville, WI

Rock County Historical Society

Try This On: A Historj' of Clothing, Gender, and Power

Page 2

March 13 - April 22. 1995

Effingham, IL

Helen Matthas Public Library

Produce for Victory: Posters on the American Home Front, 1941-1945

March 15 - April 30, 1995

Cordele, GA

Cordele-Crisp Carnegie Library

Produce for Victory: Posters on the American Home Front, 1941-1945

March 16 - May 14, 1995

New York, NY

Bard Graduate Center

English Silver: Masterpieces by Omar Ramsden

March 17 - June 4, 1995

New York, NY

American Museum of Natural History

Spiders!

March 17 - April 30, 1995 Washington, DC.

Renwick Gallery, Smithsonian Institution Full Deck Art Quilts

March 18 - April 30, 1995

Fairfield, CT

Center for Financial Studies

Who's in Charge: Workers and Managers in the United States

March 18 - April 30, 1995

Paris, TX

Hayden Museum of American Cart

Before Freedom Came: African American Life in the Antebellum South

Page 3

March 18 - April 30, 1995

St. Louis, MO

Jefferson National Expansion Memorial

American Greek Revival Architecture

April 1 - April 30, 1995

Tulsa, OK

Tulsa Junior College

Long Road Up the Hill: African Americans in Congress

April 6 - May 29, 1995

Pittsburgh, PA

Carnegie Museum of Natural History

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

April 8 - April 30, 1995

San Jacinto, CA

Mount San Jacinto College

No Laughing Matter: Political Cartoonists on the Environment

April 8 - May 7, 1995

Fort Morgan, CO

Fort Morgan Heritage Foundation

Seeds of Change

April 6 - May 18, 1995

Providence, RI

Providence Public Library

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

April 8 - May 19, 1995

Sutton, WV

Landmark Studio for the Arts

Produce for Victory: Posters on the American Home Front, 1941-1945

Page 4

April 8-May 21, 1995

Fairbanks, AK

University of Alaska Museum

The Tongass: Alaska's Magnificent Rain Forest

April 8 - May 28, 1995 Denver, CO

Mizel Museum of Judaica A Day in the Warsaw Ghetto

April 8 - June 4, 1995

Ft. Lauderdale, FL

Broward County Main Library

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

April 8 - June 18, 1995

Rochester, NY

The Strong Museum

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

April 10 - May 27, 1995 Eau Claire, WI

L.E. Phillips Memorial Library Family Folklore

April 14-June 11, 1995 Reno, NV

Nevada Historical Society Lincoln and His Contemporaries

April 15-June 25, 1995

Chicago, IL

Terra Museum of American Art

Louis Armstrong: A Cultural Legacy

Page 5

April 15 - June 25, 1996

Lx)gan KS

Dane G. Hansen Memorial Museum

Strength and Diversity: Japanese American Women, 1885-1990

April 15 - May 28, 1995 Ann Arbor, MI Ann Arbor Public Library Africa's Legacy in Mexico

April 15 - June 4, 1995

St. Leonard, MD

Jefferson Paterson Park and Museum

Climbing Jacob's Ladder: The Rise of Black Churches in Eastern American

Cities

April 15 - June 25. 1995 Jacksonville, FL Museum of Science and History More than Meets the Eye

April 22-May 21, 1995 Skokie, IL

Skokie Heritage Museum Family Folklore

April 22 - May 28, 1995

Raleigh, NC

North Carolina Museum of History

Constance Stuart Larrabee: WWII Photo Journal

May 5 - June 23, 1995

Delta, UT

Great Basin Museum

Produce for Victory: Posters on the American Home Front, 1941-1945

Page 6

May 6 - June 4, 1995

Huntsville, TX

Sam Houston Memorial Museum

After the Revolution: Everyday Life in America, 1780-1800

May 6 - June 18, 1995 Fort Wayne, IN Fort Wayne Museum of Art Songs of My People

May 6 - July 2, 1995

Austin, TX

Laguna Gloria Art Museum

Mexico: A Landscape Revisited

May 13-June 25, 1995

San Diego, CA

"B" Street Exhibition Hall

VanDerZee, Photographer (1886-1983)

May 13 - June 25, 1995

College Station, TN

Texas A&M Univ., J. Wayne Stark Gallery

Try This On: A History of Clothing, Gender, and Power

May 15 - June 24, 1995

Dixon, IL

Dixon Public Library

Produce for Victory: Posters on the American Home Front, 1941-1945

Page 7

May 15 - July 12, 1995

Heppner, OR

Morrow County Museum

Produce for Victory: Posters on the American Home Front, 1941-1945

May 15 - July 15, 1995

Gainesville, GA

Georgia Mountains Historical Museum

Produce for Victory: Posters on the American Home Front, 1941-1945

May 20 - June 18, 1995 -Springfield, IL Bank One of Springfield Long Road Up the Hill: African Americans in Congress

May 20 - July 2, 1995

Miami, FL

Miami-Dade Public Library System

Produce for Victory: Posters on the American Home Front, 1941-1945

May 20 - July 2, 1995

Fort Collins, CO

Fort Collins Museum

American Greek Revival Architecture

May 20 - July 2, 1995

Youngstown, OH

Ohio Historical Society

Who's in Charge: Workers and Managers in the United States

May 20 - July 2, 1995

Raleigh, NC

Mordecai Historic Park

Before Freedom Came: African-American Life in the Antebellum South

Pages

March 3 - May 5, 1996

Blacksburg, VA

Virginia Polytechnic Institute

An Ocean Apart: Contemporary Vietnamese Art from the United States and

Vietnam

May 20 - July 4, 1995

Portsmouth, VA

Arts Center of the Portsmouth Museums

FuU Deck Art Quilts

May 20 - Sept. 3, 1995

Pittsburgh, PA

Carnegie Museum of Naniral History

Fred E. Miller: Photographer of the Crows

May 21 - July 23, 1995

Santa Rosa, CA

Sonoma County Museum

No Laughing Matter: Political Cartoonists on the Environment

May 25 - July 5, 1996

Fairview, UT

Fairview Museum of History and Art

Lincoln and His Contemporaries

May 27 - June 25, 1995 Sheffield, OH

French Creek Nature Center Seeds of Change

May 27 - July 23, 1995

Syracuse, NY

Erie Canal Museum

Before Freedom Came: African American Life in the Antebellum South

Page 9

June 1 - July 13, 1995

St. Johnsbury, VT

St. Johnsbury Athenaeum

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

June 3 - Sept. 24, 1995

Juneau, AK

Alaska State Museum

The Tongass: Alaska's Magnificent Rain Forest

June 8 - July 20, 1995

Wisconsin Rapids, WI

McMillan Memorial Library

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

June 10 - July 9, 1995 Wapakoneta, OH Auglaize County Courthouse Family Folklore

June 10 - July 23, 1995

Scranton, PA

Everhart Museum

Major League/Minor League: America's Baseball Stadiums by Jim Dow

June 17 - July 16, 1995

Tallahassee, FL

Tallahassee Museum of History and Natural Science

Family Folklore

June 17 - July 30, 1995

San Antonio, TX

Witte Museum of Science and History

Africa's Legacy in Mexico

Page 10

June 24-July 23, 1995

Willsborough, NY

Essex Maritime Festival

After the Revolutions: Everyday Life in America, 1780-1800

June 24 - Aug. 6, 1995 Columbus, OH King Arts Complex Climbing Jacob's Ladder: American Cities

The Rise of Black Churches in Eastern

June 24 - Aug. 20, 1995 Bryan, TX

Brazos Valley Museum Two Eagles/Dos Aguilas:

A Natural History of the Mexico-U.S. Borderlands

July 1 - Sept. 24, 1995 Bloomfield Hills, MI Cranbrook Institute of Science Spiders!

July 7 - Aug. 25, 1995

Castle Dale, UT

Museum of the San Rafael

Produce for Victory: Posters on the American Home Front, 1941-1945

July 8 - Sept. 17, 1995

Memphis, TN

National Civil Rights Museum

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

July 8 - Aug. 6, 1995

Ft. Lauderdale, FL

African American Caribbean Cultural Center

Long Road Up the Hill: African Americans in Congress

1078 Page 11

July 8-Oct. 1, 1995 Pittsburgh, PA

Pittsburgh Children's Museum The Kids Bridge

July 10 - Aug. 27, 1995

San Francisco, CA

San Francisco Jazz Festival

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

July 15 - Aug. 13, 1995

Ocala, FL

Central Florida Community College

Seeds of Change

July 15 - Aug. 27, 1995

Tallahassee, FL

Tallahassee Museum of History and Natural Science

Try This On: A History of Clothing, Gender, and Power

July 15 - Aug. 27, 1995

Lowell, MA

Whistler House and Parker Gallery

VanDerZee, Photographer (1886-1983)

July 21 - Sept. 17, 1995 Tucson, AZ Tucson Museum of Art Mexico: A Landscape Revisited

July 22 - Sept. 3, 1995

San Jose, CA

American Museum of Quilts and Textiles

Full Deck Art Quilts

1079 Page 12

July 22 - Sept. 3, 1995

Elmhurst, IL

Elmhurst Historical Museum

Who's in Charge: Workers and Managers in the United States

July 22 - Sept. 3, 1995

Winchester, VA

Kurtz Cultural Center

Before Freedom Came: African-American Life in the Antebellum South

July 22 - Sept. 3, 1995

New York, NY

Haines, Lundberg & Waehler

American Greek Revival Architecture

July 22-Oct. 1, 1995

Las Vegas, NV

Barrick Museum of Natural History, Univ. of Nevada at Las Vegas

Strength and Diversity: Japanese American Women, 1885-1990

July 27 - Sept. 7, 1995

Hyattsville, MD

Prince George's County Memorial Library

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

July 27 - Sept. 7, 1995

Minneapolis, MN

Minneapolis Public Library and Information Center

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

July 28 - Sept. 30, 1995

Moro, OR

Sherman County Historical Society

Produce for Victory: Posters on the American Home Front, 1941-1945

24-697 96-35

Page 13

July 29 - Aug. 27, 1995 Nanuet, NY Nanuet Mall Family Folklore

July 29 - Oct. 8, 1995

Camden, NJ

Stedman Art Gallery, Rutgers University

Louis Armstrong: A Cultural Legacy

Aug. 5 - Sept. 5, 1995 Streamwood, IL Streamwood Park District Family Folklore

Aug. 5 - Sept. 5, 1995

AuTrain, MI

Paulson House Museum

Saynday Was Coming Along: Silverhorn's Drawings of the Kiowa Trickster

Aug. 12 - Sept. 13, 1995

Frederick, MD

Delaplaine Visual Arts Center

After the Revolution: Everyday Life in America, 1780-1800

Aug. 12 - Sept. 24, 1995

Haverhill, MA

Northern Essex Community College

Major League/Minor League: America's Baseball Stadiums by Jim Dow

Aug. 12 - Nov. 26, 1995

Ukiah, CA

Grace Hudson Museum

No Laughing Matter: Political Cartoonists on the Environment

Page 14

Aug. 19-Oct. 1, 1995

Roanoke, VA

Harrison Museum of African American Culture

Africa's Legacy in Mexico

Aug. 19 - Oct. 15, 1995

Atlanta, GA

Atlanta History Museum

Before Freedom Came: African American Life in the Antebellum South

Aug. 26 - Sept. 24, 1995

Martin, TN

University of Tennessee at Martin

Long Road Up the Hill: African Americans in Congress

Aug. 26 - Oct. 8, 1995

Atlanta, GA

Atlanta University Center

Climbing Jacob's Ladder: The Rise of Black Churches in Eastern American

Cities

Sept. 2-Oct. 1, 1995 New York, NY Fraunces Tavern Museum Seeds of Change

Sept. 5 - Oct. 28, 1995

Arlington, VA

Ellipse Arts Center

An Ocean Apart: Vietnamese Contemporary Art from the United States and

Vietnam

Sept. 9 - Oct. 22. 1995 Winston-Salem, NC Winston-Salem State University Songs of My People

1082 Page 15

Sept. 9- 1995-Jan. 21, 1996

Dallas, TX

Dallas Museum of Natural History

Two Eagles/Dos Aguilas: A Natural History of the Mexico-U.S. Borderlands

Sept. 9 - 19, 1995

Monterey, CA

Monterey Jazz Festival

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

Sept. - Oct. 15, 1995

Chicago, IL

Chicago Public Library

Lincoln and His Contemporaries

Sept. 16 - Oct. 15, 1995 Livingston, AL Livingston University Family Folklore

Sept. 16 - Oct. 29, 1995

Flint, MI

Sloan Museum

Try This On: A History of Clothing, Gender, and Power

Sept. 16 , 1995 - Jan. 2, 1996 Staten Island, NY Alice Austin House Museum VanDerZee, Photographer (1886-1983)

Sept. 19-24, 1995

Washington, D.C.

Congressional Black Caucus

Before Freedom Came: African American Life in the Antebellum South

Page 16

Sept. 21 - Nov. 2, 1995

New Haven, CT

New Haven Free Public Library

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

Sept. 21 - Nov. 2, 1995

Lincoln, NE

University of Nebraska at Lincoln

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

Sept. 23 - Oct. 22, 1995

Sault Ste. Marie, MI

River of History Museum

Saynday Was Coming Along: Silverhorn's Drawings of the Kiowa Trickster

Sept. 23 - Nov. 5, 1995

Tempe, AZ

Arizona State University Art Museum

Full Deck Art Quilts

Sept. 23 - Nov. 5, 1995

Haverhill, MA

Northern Essex Community College

American Greek Revival Architecture

Sept. 29-30, 1995

Preparatory Workshop: Produce for Victory

Participants: Arizona Humanities Council Arizona State University Indiana Humanities Council Indiana State University Nebraska Humanities Council University of Nebraska California Humanities Council Utah Humanities Council

Page 17

Sept. 30 - Oct. 29, 1995

Athens, GA

University of Georgia Museum

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

Sept. 30 - Oct. 29, 1995

Adrian, MI

Adrian College, Shipman Library

After the Revolution: Everyday Life in America, 1780-1800

Sept. 30 - Nov. 12, 1995

Concord, NH

New Hampshire Historical Society

Produce for Victory: Posters on the American Home Front, 1941-1945

Oct. 1 - Nov. 12, 1995

Piney Flats, TN

Rocky Mount Historical Association

Before Freedom Came: African American Life in the Antebellum South

Oct. 7 - Nov. 12, 1995

Cleveland, OH

Cleveland Center for Contemporary Art

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

Oct. 7 - Dec. 3, 1995 Memphis, TN

Memphis Brooks Museum of art Mexico: A Landscape Revisited

Oct. 10, 1995 - Jan. 3, 1996

Washington, D.C.

International Gallery, S. Dillon Ripley Center, Smithsonian Instimtion

Voyages and Visions: Nineteenth-Century European Images of the Middle East

Page 18

Oct. 14 - Nov. 12, 1995

Baltimore, MD

Baltimore City Community College

The Long Road Up the Hill: African Americans in Congress

Oct. 14 - Nov. 26, 1995

Hendersonville, NC

Henderson County Library

Major League/Minor League: America's Baseball Stadiums by Jim Dow

Oct. 21 - Nov. 19, 1995 Laredo, TX

Laredo Children's Museum Seeds of Change

Oct. 23-24, 1995

Preparatory Workshop: An Ocean Apart

Participants: Ellipse Arts Center, Arlington, VA

James A. Michener Art Museum, Doyelstown, PA Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg, VA San Jose Museum of Art, San Jose, CA Robert Hull Fleming Museum, Burlington, VT Lompoc Museum, Lompoc, CA Pensacola Museum of Art, Pensacola, CA

Oct. 23, 1995 - Feb. 2, 1996 El Paso, TX

University of Texas at El Paso Africa's Legacy in Mexico

Oct. 28 - Dec. 10, 1995

San Diego, CA

African American Museum of Fine Arts, Lyceum Theater

Climbing Jacob's Ladder: The Rise of Black Churches in Eastern American

Cities

1086 Page 19

Oct. 28 - Dec. 10, 1995

Providence, RI

Johnson and Wales University

Climbing Jacob's Ladder: The Rise of Black Churches in Eastern American

Cities

Oct. 28, 1995 - Jan. 7. 1996

New Orleans, LA

New Orleans Museum of Art

Louis Armstrong: A Cultural Legacy

Nov. 18, 1995-Feb. 18, 1996

Doylestown, PA

James A. Michener Art Museum

An Ocean Apart: Contemporary Vietnamese Art from the United States and

Vietnam

Oct. 28, 1995 - Jan. 14, 1996

Arvada, CO

Arvada Center for the Arts and Humanities

Strength and Diversity: Japanese American Women, 1885-1990

Oct. 28, 1995-Jan. 21, 1996 Houston, TX

Children's Museum of Houston The Kids Bridge

Oct. 28, 1995 - Jan. 7, 1996 Milwaukee, WI

Betty Brinn Children's Museum More Than Meets the Eye

Nov. 4 - Dec. 17, 1996

Fort Wayne, IN

Lincoln Museum

Page 20

Nov. 4 - Dec. 3, 1995 Tulsa, OK Tulsa Junior College Family Folklore

Nov. 4 - Dec. 17, 1996

Baltimore, MD

Roland park Country School

Fred E. Miller: Photographer of the Crows

Nov. 11 -Dec. 10, 1995

Dayton, OH

Sinclair Community College

Saynday Was Coming Along: Silverhorn's Drawings of the Kiowa Trickster

Nov. 11, 1995-Jan. 2, 1996 Savannah, GA

King-Tisdell Cottage Foundation, Inc. Songs of My People

Nov. 16 - Dec. 28, 1995

Wichita, KS

Wichita Public Library

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

Nov. 11, 1995-Jan. 7, 1996

Wilmington, NC

Cape Fear Museum

Before Freedom Came: African American Life in the Antebellum South

Nov. 18 - Dec. 17, 1995

Sacramento, CA

California State University

After the Revolution: Everyday Life in America, 1780-1800

1088 Page 21

Nov. 15, 1995 -Feb. 11, 1996 Washington, D.C.

National Geographic Society Explorers Hall Earth 2U, Exploring Geography

Nov. 16 - Dec. 28, 1995

Manalapan, NJ

Monmouth County Library

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

Nov. 18-Dec. 31, 1995

Clarksville, TN

Clarksville-Montgomery County Museum

Try This On: A History of Clothing, Gender, and Power

Nov. 25, 1995 - Jan. 7, 1996

Miami, FL

Miami-Dade Public Library System

Before Freedom Came: African American Life in the Antebellum South

Nov. 25, 1995 - Jan. 7, 1996 Williamsport, PA Old Jail Center Full Deck Art Quilts

Nov. 25, 1995-Jan. 21, 1996

Boston, MA

Boston Public Library

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

Dec. 1, 1995-Jan. 7, 1996

Ocala, FL

Central Florida Community College

American Greek Revival Architecture

Page 22

Dec. 2-Dec. 31, 1995

Durham, NC

St. Joseph's Historical Foundation

The Long Road Up the Hill: African Americans in Congress

Dec. 2, 1995 - Jan. 14, 1996

Lafayette, GA

Cherokee Regional Library

Produce for Victory: Posters on the American Home Front, 1941-1945

Dec. 9, 1995 - March 27, 1996

Chicago, IL

DuSable Museum of African American History

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

Dec. 16, 1995 - Jan. 28, 1996

Harlingen, TX

Rio Grande Valley Museum

No Laughing Matter: Political Cartoonists on the Environment

Dec. 16, 1995 - March 31, 1996

Los Angeles, CA

Natural History Museum of Los Angeles

The Tongass: Alaska's Magnificent Rain Forest

Dec. 30, 1995-Feb. 11, 1996

Bangor, ME

Bangor Theological Seminary

Climbing Jacob's Ladder: The Rise of Black Churches in Eastern American

Cities

Page 23

Jan. 4-5, 1996

Preparatory Workshop: Produce for Victory

Participants: Lompoc Museum, Lompoc, CA

Corona Public Library, Corona, CA Tulac History Museum, Tulac, CA Mary Aaron Museum, Marysville, CA California Humanities Council

Jan. 5, 1996-March 31, 1996

Lompoc, CA

Lompoc Museum

Produce for Victory: Posters on the American Home Front, 1941-1945

Jan. 6 - Feb. 4, 1996

Milledgeville, GA

Allied Arts, John Marlor Arts Center

After the Revolutions: Everyday Life in America, 1780-1800

Jan. 11 -Feb. 22, 1996

Xenia, OH

Greene County Public Library

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

Jan. 11 -Feb. 22, 1996

San Antonio, TX

San Antonio Public Library

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

Jan. 14 - April 30, 1995

Hartford, CT

Connecticut Historical Society

Produce for Victory: Posters on the American Home Front, 1941-1945

Page 24

Jan. 15 - March 10, 1996

Washington, D.C.

National Museum of American History, Smithsonian Institution

Who's in Charge: Workers and Managers in the United States

Jan.. 19-March 3, 1996

Williamsburg, VA

Muscarelle Museum of Art, College of William and Mary

Voyages and Visions: Nineteenth-Century European Images of the Middle East

Jan. 20 - Feb. 18, 1996

Greensboro, NC

Mattye Reed African Heritage Center

The Long Road Up the Hill: African Americans in Congress

Jan. 20 - March 3, 1996

Baton Rouge, LA

Louisiana Arts and Science Center

VanDerZee, Photographer (1886-1983)

Jan. 20 - May 5, 1996

Madison, WI

State Historical Museum

Try This On: A History of Clothing, Gender, and Power

Jan. 27 - March 10, 1996 Medford, MA

Tufts University Art Gallery Songs of My People

Jan. 27 - March 10, 1996

Raleigh, NC

Historic Oakview County Park

American Greek Revival Architecture

Page 25

Jan. 27 - March 10, 1996

Clarksville, TN

Austin Peay State University

Before Freedom Came: African American Life in the Antebellum South

Jan. 27 - March 10, 1996 Abingdon, VA

William King Regional Art Center Full Deck Art Quilts

Jan. 27 - March 24, 1996

Frostburg, MD

Frostburg State University

Whispered Silences: Japanese American Detention Camps, Fifty Years Later

Jan. 27 - April 7, 1996

Rochester, NY

Strong Museum

Louis Armstrong: A Cultural Legacy

Jan. 27 - Nov. 17, 1996

Bozeman, MT

Museum of the Rockies

Fred E. Miller: Photographer of the Crows

Statewide circulation of Earth 2U, Exploring Geography "Discovery Trunk" to elementary school teachers throughout California begins in February, 1996

District-wide circulation of Earth 2U, Exploring Geography "Discovery Trunk" to elementary school teachers begins in February 1996

Feb. 1 - May 3, 1996

Payson, AZ

Northern Gila County Historical Society

Produce for Victory: Posters on the American Home Front, 1941-1945

Page 26

Feb. 2-10, 1996

Preparatory Workshop: Earth 2U, Exploring Geography

Participants: Cumberland Science Museum, Nashville, TN Frank H. McClung Museum, Knoxville, TN Dane G. Hansen Memorial Museum, Logan, KS Fullerton Museum, Fullerton, CA Bamum Museum, Bridgeport, CT Museum of Science and Industry, Chicago, IL Discovery Center Museum, Rockford, IL

Feb. 3 - March 17, 1996

Opelika, AL

Museum of East Alabama

Produce for Victory: Posters on the American Home Front, 1941-1945

Feb. 3-March 31, 1996

Greensboro, NC

Greensboro Historical Museum

Before Freedom Came: African American Life in the Antebellum South

Feb. 10 - April 7, 1996

Charlotte, NC

Public Library of Charlotte and Mecklenburg Counties

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

Feb. 10 - April 7, 1996

Lubbock. TX

Museum of Texas Tech University

Two Eagles/Dos Aguilas: A Natural History of the Mexico-U.S. Borderlands

Feb. 10 - May 5, 1996 Philadelphia, PA Academy of Natural Sciences Spiders!

1094 Page 27

Feb. 17-March 31, 1996

Lansing, MI

Lansing Mall

Major League/Minor League: America's Baseball Stadiums by Jim Dow

Feb. 17 - May 12, 1996 Memphis, TN

National Civil Rights Museum The Kids Bridge

Feb. 24 - March 24, 1996

Greensboro, NC

Tannenbaum Park

After the Revolution: Everyday Life in America, 1780-1800

Feb. 24 - April 7, 1996 Montezuma, KS Stauth Memorial Museum The Prairie Schoolhouse

Feb. 25,- April 23, 1995 Worcester, MA Worcesfer Art Museum Mexico: A Landscape Revisited

Feb. 25-26, 1996

Preparatory Workshop: Produce for Victory

Participants: Warwick County Museum, Boonville, IN Stevens Memorial Museum, Salem, IN Marshall County Historical Society, Plymouth, IN Indiana Humanities Council

Statewide circulation of Earth 2U, Exploring Geography "Discovery Trunk" to elementary school teachers throughout Colorado begins in March, 1996

Page 28

Statewide circulation of Earth 2U, Exploring Geography "Discovery Trunk" to elementary school teachers throughout Connecticut begins in March, 1996

Statewide circulation of Earth 2U, Exploring Geography "Discovery Trunk" to elementary school teachers throughout Indiana begins in March, 1996

Statewide circulation of Earth 2U, Exploring Geography "Discovery Trunk" to elementary school teachers throughout Maryland begins in March, 1996

Statewide circulation of Earth 2U, Exploring Geography "Discovery Trunk" to elementary school teachers throughout Tennessee begins in March, 1996

March 1 -May 1, 1996

Boonville, IN

Warrick County Museum

Produce for Victory: Posters on the American Home Front

March 2-May 5, 1996

Wilmington, DE

Historical Society of Delaware

Climbing Jacob's Ladder: The Rise of Black Churches in Eastern American

Cities

March 3-April 21. 1995

Vernal, UT

Uintah County Library

Produce for Victory: Posters on the American Home Front, 1941-1945

March 3 - May 25, 1996

Fort Wayne, IN

Lincoln Museum

American Greek Revival Architecture

Page 29

March 15 - June 23, 1996

Los Angeles, CA

California Afro-American Museum

Before Freedom Came: African American Life in the Antebellum South

March 7 - April 18, 1996

Champaign, IL

Champaign Public Library

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

March 7-April 18, 1996

Glendale, AZ

Glendale Public Library

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

March 9 - April 7, 1996

Westminster, MD

Western Maryland College

The Long Road Up the Hill: African Americans in Congress

March 9 - June 2, 1996

Nashville, TN

Cumberland Museum and Science Center

Earth 2U, Exploring Geography

March 10, 1996 - May 12, 1996 Birmingham, AL Birmingham Civil Rights Instimte Songs of My People

March 11 -Aug. 26, 1996

Bisbee, AZ

Bisbee Mining & Historical Museum

Produce for Victory: Posters on the American Home Front, 1941-1945

Page 30

March 14 - May 5, 1996

Taft, CA

Taft College

Saynday Was Coining Along: Silverhorn's Drawings of the Kiowa Trickster

March 20 - May 12, 1996 Ocala, FL

Central Florida Community College Full Deck Art Quilts

March 20 - June 16, 1996 Lompoc, CA Lompoc Museum The Prairie Schoolhouse

March 20 - Aug. 18, 1996

San Jose, CA

San Jose Museum of Art

An Ocean Apart: Contemporary Vietnamese Art from the United States and

Vietnam

March 21-24, 1996

Washington, D.C.

Union Station

Art in Celebration!

Presented on board Artrain, America's Museum on the Rails

March 22 - May 10, 1996 Layton, UT

Heritage Museum of Layton Lincoln and His Contemporaries

March 25 - Sept. 9. 1996

Bridgeport, CT

Barnum Museum

Try This On: A History of Clothing, Gender, and Power

Page 31

March 23 - May 5, 1996

Boston, MA

Museum of Afro-American History

VanDerZee, Photographer (1886-1983)

March 27 - June 9, 1996 Lompoc, CA Lompoc Museum The Prairie Schoolhouse

March 30 - April 3, 1996

Chambersburg, PA

Chambersburg Train Depot

Art in Celebration!

Presented on board Artrain, America's Museum on the Rails

Page 32

March 30 - May 12, 1996

St. Louis, MO

Vaughn Cultural Center/Urban League

Before Freedom Came: African American Life in the Antebellum South

March 30 - May 25, 1996

Vincennes, IN

Indiana Military Museum, Inc.

Produce for Victory: Posters on the American Home Front, 1941-1945

March 30 - May 26, 1996

Knoxville, TN

University of Tennessee, Frank H. McClung Museum

Earth 2U, Exploring Geography

Statewide circulation of Earth 2U, Exploring Geography "Discovery Trunk" to elementary school teachers throughout Georgia begins in April, 1996

Statewide circulation of Earth 2U, Exploring Geography "Discovery Trunk" to elementary school teachers throughout Illinois begins in April 1996

Statewide circulation of Earth 2U, Exploring Geography "Discovery Trunk" to elementary school teachers throughout Kansas begins in April, 1996

Statewide circulation of Earth 2U, Exploring Geography "Discovery Trunk" to elementary school teachers throughout Massachusetts begins in April 1996

April 2-June 13, 1996

Greenfield, IN

Greenfield Public Library

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

>^

Page 33

April 4 - June 16, 1996

New Orleans, LA

Perseverance Hall

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

April 4 - June 16, 1996

Cincinnati, OH

Arts Consortium of Cincinnati

Climbing Jacob's Ladder: The Rise of Black Churches in Eastern American

Cities

April 6 - May 19, 1996

Duluth, MN

Lake Superior Museum of Transportation

Produce for Victory: Posters on the American Home Front, 1941-1945

April 8-May 21, 1995

Naples, FL

Philharmonic Center for the Arts

Major League/Minor League: America's Baseball Stadiums by Jim Dow

April 11-14, 1996

Norfolk, VA

Norfolk Train Depot

Art in Celebration!

Presented on board Artrain, America's Museum on the Rails

April 11 -July 21, 1996

San Antonio, TX

Witte Museum of Science and History

More Than Meets the Eye

April 12 - June 15, 1996

Savannah, GA

Telfair Academy of Arts and Science

Louis Armstrong: A Cultural Legacy

Page 34

April 13 - May 5. 1996

Thibodaux, LA

Wetlands Acadian Cultural Center

After the Revolution: Everyday Life in America, 1780-1800

April 13 - June 9, 1996

Farmington, NH

Farmington Museum

Whispered Silences: Japanese American Detention Camps, Fifty years Later

April 18-21, 1996

Edenton, NC

Edenton Train Depot

Art in Celebration!

Presented on board Artrain, America's Museum on the Rails

April 20 - Aug. 4, 1996

Greensboro, NC

Greensboro Historical Museum

Major League/Minor League: America's Baseball Stadiums by Jim Dow

April 20 - May 28, 1995

Satanta, KS

Dudley Township Public Library

Saynday Was Coming Along: Silverhorn's Drawings of the Kiowa Trickster

April 20 - June 2, 1996

Lawrence, KS

Natural History Museum, Univ. of Kansas

The Tongass: Alaska's Magnificent Rain Forest

April 20 - June 23. 1996

Flint. MI

Mott Community College Library

Beyond Category: The Musical Genius of Duke Ellington

Page 35

April 25-26, 1996

Preparatory Workshop: Produce for Victory

Participants: Filmore County Historical Society, Filmore, NE Nemaha Valley Museum, Auburn, NE Meridian Museum, Cozad, NE Banner County History Society, Harrisburg, NE Nebraska Humanities Council

April 25 - Sept. 8, 1996

Wilberforce, OH

National Afro-American Museum and Cultural Center

Van DerZee, Photographer (1886-1983)

April 27 - June 23, 1996

El Paso, TX

University of Texas at El Paso

Two Eagles/Dos Aguilas: A Natural History of the Mexico-U.S. Borderlands

FY 1995 Buyouts

Question 39: Last year 229 individuals took advantage of the buy out opportunity. Of that number, 206 were Federal positions and 23 were trust fund employees. Have these positions been eliminated or has the Smithsonian refilled those positions?

Answer: Essentially all of those positions have been eliminated. However, because the incentive program was truly voluntary, several units were severely depleted and unable to execute basic tasks. Several have since been reorganized and become parts of other entities, and in five instances "backfill" of positions was approved.

Report of the Commission on the Future of the Smithsonian Institution

Question 40: I read with interest the report of the Commission on the Future of the Smithsonian Institution "E Pluribus Unum: This Divine Paradox." I was particularly interested in the report's conclusion that the Smithsonian will not be able to "do everything we all want to do" and "that it must choose between established, even cherished, activities and new programs." I am curious about your response to that conclusion and how specifically you are prepared to made those choices?

Answer: The conclusion of the report of the Committee on the Future of the Smithsonian Institution reflects the reality, not only of the funding environment, now and into the foreseeable future, but also of the capacity to guide with excellence and responsibility a large Institution with competing demands and disparate interests.

The Smithsonian is a smaller entity in terms of staff than it was two years ago, differently organized in order to make the most effective use of that staff and of decreased levels of Federal operational funding, while also venturing into new areas, such as those reflected by growing electronic outreach and activities surrounding the Institution's 150th anniversary. The Institution is seeking to streamline and stabilize its oper?tional base and facilities infrastructure in order to assure far into the future a lively range of imaginative public programming that will attract and be supported by non-Federal resources.

Through internal processes of planning and evaluation, various activities are likely to be reorganized, streamlined, and even eliminated, while others, such as the National Museum of the American Indian and the Extension of the National Air and Space Museum come into being in fulfillment of statutory obligations and Institutional commitments with respect to the collections embraced by those units.

Collections Management

Question 41: The report recommends a master plan for maintenance of the collections and also recommends long-term or permanent loans to partner institutions. Have you prepared

24-697 96-36

such a master plan and what is your response to the recommendation concerning increased loans?

Answer: Since 1980 the Smithsonian has had in place a collections management policy that stresses requirements for access to and accountability for the collections with which it has been entrusted. The policy was revised in 1992 to emphasize internal controls, the creation of collecting plans, and the management of collections information.

Each Smithsonian unit that collects has an on-going program of evaluating the condition and maintenance of its collections. These programs and the collections management policy under which they have been established are being examined from several perspectives. The Smithsonian Council, a group of external museum professionals and academicians that meets annually, is chief among those currently exploring the range of issues that affect Smithsonian collections. Its meeting this fall, as well as the results of other examinations, are expected to lead to adjustments, if not full-scale rearticulation, of the Smithsonian's overall collections management policy and implementation of programs under it.

Because of Institutional responsibilities for collections, many of which have restrictions with'respect to their use, permanent loans or transfers are relatively rare. However, long-term loans that hold out the prospect of renewal if appropriate conditions are met are relatively common. The idea of increasing loans of any kind is certainly welcome because it would mean that the knowledge inherent in objects loaned can be developed and shared. It must be borne in mind, however, that in order to loan objects, organizations that will use them wisely and treat them well must be interested in receiving them.

Question 42: Does the Smithsonian currently have any of its collection on long-term or permanent loan and if so what success have you had with this? Is this an effective means of broadening the Smithsonian outreach? Would this also alleviate what you have identified as the most critical collections management issue, i.e. inadequate storage for the collections?

Answer: Lending objects and specimens for exhibition, research, and study is an integral part of the Smithsonian's mission to make museum collections accessible to the widest possible audience, from scholar to school child. Currently the Smithsonian has numerous collections or collection items on long-term loan for educational and scientific purposes. However, the Institution does not use the term "permanent" in describing long-term loans. According to policy and practice, the Smithsonian does not contract permanent loans. The term "permanent" loan is a misnomer because "permanent" possession can not be given to a museum by virtue of a "loan" agreement. All loans, including long-term loans, are temporary arrangements governed by a loan agreement that stipulates the purpose, length of the loan period with renewal options, and the specific loan conditions.

The National Museum of Natural History (NMNH) has several biological collections on long-term loan to other institutions employing researchers who are actively studying these groups. As examples, the Museum's Ixodida (tick) collections are on long-term loan to the

Institute of Arthropodology and Parasitology at Georgia Southern University in Statestwro, the Bombyliidae (bee flies) collection is on loan to the Bishop Museum, Honolulu, and the Museum's fungus collection is located at the Agricultural Research Service in Beltsville, Maryland. Such loans are a good way to ensure effective research use of these particular collections containing taxonomic groups not currently covered by NMNH stafTs research interests. In addition, under a memorandum of agreement with the Anchorage Museum of History and Art, the Natural History Museum is planning the long-term loan of ethnographic materials collected on Kodiak Island in 1880. In this case, the Institution is pleased to be able to broaden Smithsonian outreach by having the material studied and displayed in the region in which the collection originated.

The National Air and Space Museum (NASM) has long-term agreements with various federal agencies that are also primary sources of collection acquisitions. For example, the Saturn V launch vehicle situated at NASA's Kennedy Space Center and the Folke-Wulf FW-190 German fighter plane and Loening Amphibian located at the US Air Force Museum at Wright-Patterson Airbase in Ohio are on long-term loan. In the first instance, NASA is willing to undertake a costly restoration and provide the necessary building to house the Saturn V. On account of its size, the Saturn V will remain in Florida indefinitely as the means of moving such an object is prohibitive in terms of cost or having the availability of the equipment required to handle such an artifact. Some long-term borrowers, such as the Kansas Cosmosphere and Space Center and US Rocket and Space Center in Alabama, offer NASM a means of providing object care that the museum may be unable to support. Such loans also enable the public in particular regions of the country to see historically important objects that are not readily available elsewhere.

While an effective means of outreach, most long-term loans have not been initiated for the primary purpose of alleviating inadequate collections storage. The number of long-term loans will always remain small relative to our overall collection size, thereby providing little relief relative to space needs. In addition, although on long-term loan, museums still have a fiduciary responsibility for oversight of these collections which may entail additional costs and resources. Lx)ans require review, monitoring, record-keeping, on-site inspection, and conservation by Smithsonian staff. A borrowing institution may wish to terminate and return a loan to the Institution at any time during the loan period. Within the framework of conditions stipulated by the loan agreement, the Smithsonian needs to be prepared to accept or retrieve the loan. If adequate storage were not available, the Smithsonian would have to cover the borrowing organization's expenses for continued storage and maintenance until storage could be arranged by the Institution. In the meantime, the Smithsonian continues lo actively pursue the sharing of collections by loan as part of the Institution's outreach efforts.

Question 43: I was intrigued by the proposed partnerships with institutions outside Washington. The report concludes that the Smithsonian's resources could be shared with a larger number of citizens if the Institution forms partnerships with selected institutions. What if anything has been done to implement this recommendation? What funding would be needed

to implement this partnership recommendation and what savings could be realized in terms of reduced storage needs, etc.?

Answer: Institutional partnerships are a significant way of sharing Smithsonian resources more widely. One example is the Extension of the National Air and Space Museum, which, while not very far outside of Washington, is a partnership between the Smithsonian, the Federal Government, the Commonwealth of Virginia, and the private sector that will enable the Institution to restore and display objects of air and space in a manner that would not otherwise be possible. With the Federal investment of $8 million in planning funds, an incomparable collection is assured of long-term preservation, the public is assured of greater accessibility to it, and Federal accounts are assured of savings by avoiding additional maintenance and reconstruction costs at the Garber Facility in Maryland.

The Smithsonian also has a long history of partnerships in the form of traveling exhibitions, the loan of objects and specimens, and of providing expertise by making staff available to other organizations to address specific problems or, for example, developing particular educational resources.

The Institution's Board of Regents is reviewing the concept of affiliations, or partnerships, with other institutions, and from time to time receives proposals along such lines. A recommendation in this regard is expected in the fall. It would seem that partnerships are likely to be developed on a case-by-case basis within broad guidelines, yet to be established, that must of necessity take into account the needs and interests of the Smithsonian, as well as those of the partner organization. Only with a specific proposal in hand can implementation costs be determined and savings estimated.

R^>air and Restoration of Buildings

Question 44: The report also recommends that attention and resources be devoted to the rehabilitation and maintenance of existing facilities versus new construction. It recommends $50 million a year for 10 years. Your budget includes $38 million which is a $4 million increase for this purpose. Does this merely delay completing the task or does it put some of the facilities and the collections at risk?

Answer: Several of the Institutions' facilities, and the collections housed in them, are already at risk. The Natural History Museum and the American Art and Portrait Gallery, in particular, are both now in poor condition. The Arts and Industries and Smithsonian "Castle" are nearing that state. Until the Institution can replace the major building systems in those buildings, the risk of system failure will remain. Even a partial system failure could result in closing a portion of a building or damage to collections in that building. Funding at the $38 million level will allow the Institution to achieve some progress in replacing the systems, but most of the annual resources wiU be spent to repair components that actually break.

Question 45: Your budget justification (pg.82) shows a chart projecting the condition of the Smithsonian facilities in the year 2001 if $50 million is provided annually for repair and rehab. What would that chart look like at the FY 1996 conference level of $33 million? What would the chart look like at the requested level of $38 million. How many buildings would fall below the minimally acceptable performance at these levels?

Answer: The charts below illustrate projected facility conditions in the year 2001 if R&R funding were to remain at the FY 1996 conference level of $33.9 million, and also at the FY 1997 requested level of $38 million, for the next five years. In both cases, at least three buildings (Natural History, American Art and Portrait Gallery, and Arts and Industries) would be below minimally acceptable performance in the year 2001.

«34 MUSon FY 1996 Conference Level

Pmjtcted Facllitlts Conditions

Life-Cycle Time in Years

♦ 38 MUnon FY 1997 Requeet

Ufa-Cyclo Timo in Yoan

Controlling Growth of Collections

Question 46: What is your policy with respect to controlling the growth of your collections?

Answer: The Institution's and museums' collections management policies set criteria and authority for collections acquisition and deaccession activities that control growth of the collections.

The Smithsonian acquires items only after careful consideration by museum curators, collections managers, directors, and in some cases the Secretary. Because of rigorous selection processes, the Institution adds to the collections only a small percentage of what is offered.

For example, at the National Museum of Natural History, where the vast majority of our collections reside, each departmental Collections Advisory Committee rules on proposed acquisitions unless higher levels of approval are required by policy. Collections are considered for acquisition on the basis of various criteria that include: quality; rarity; intellectual value; cultural diversity; attribution or provenance; size, volume, or quantity of the collections; price; cost of conservation, storage, and maintenance; restrictions of use; and potential for use in exhibitions and research. When an important collection cannot be accommodated, staff may assist potential donors in locating other repositories that can effectively use the collection for educational and scientific purposes.

Collections growth is also controlled through prudent deaccessioning of items, or disposing of items prior to formal accessioning. The National Museum of Natural History routinely culls field collections prior to accessioning. Methods of disposal include exchange, donation, transfer, and destruction. Through these methods, the Natural History Museum in recent years has been able to slow the rate of new acquisitions. During the first half of the 1980's, the Museum acquired collections at an average rate of over one million items per year. In comparison, during the first half of this decade, the average rate has dropped to approximately 400,000 items per year. For 1995, the Museum acquired 202,000 specimens and deaccessioned 278,816 specunens.

In the near future the Institution's collections management policy will undergo a complete review. During its course, the acquisition and deaccession of collections will be reexamined in the context of the centrality of collections to the Institutional mission and of the costs of their care and storage, which will include an assessment of facility requirements.

Question 47: The Commission's report admits that while some of the Institution's collections were created "systematically" others were gathered "in a less organized fashion. Given that maybe not all of the Smithsonian's collections are equal, has any thought been given to reviewing the collections with a possible eye toward deaccessioning?

Answer: Collecting is a combination of intelligent selection and thoughtful pruning. The Institution regularly makes decisions to reject a proposed acquisition or to deaccession items already in the collections. Deaccessioning, however, cannot be undertaken indiscriminately and, if viewed as such, can become a matter of great public concern.

Deaccessioning is viewed quite differently by each of the Institution's disciplines. For instance, a third example of an object in one museum may be viewed as redundant and therefore a candidate for deaccessioning, whereas one hundred examples of a specimen may be viewed as inadequate for study, analysis, or for serving as scientific vouchers in another. A large portion of the National Collections are these scientific and historical vouchers, as the Smithsonian, by statute, is the official repository for collections resulting from government-sponsored investigations. Voucher collections serve as essential documentation for important scientific conclusions or the documentation of important historical events. As such they are frequently checked and rechecked by scholars and others who have reasons to verify or challenge published information. In addition, rapid technological change continues to make our collections valuable in ways no one in the past could have anticipated. Could one predict that museum collections would be a valuable source of DNA for characterizing threatened or endangered species? These are just two examples of issues that emphasize the need for thoughtful consideration of any proposed deaccession. Museums cannot collect everything, but any museum contemplating a deaccession must bear in mind that museums exist to serve the public now and into the future.

That said, the Institution intends to review its collections management policy, at which time acquisitions and deaccessioning will be examined. In addition, the Smithsonian Council will be examining collections across the Institution as their topic of review in the fall of 1996. At that time the Institution's senior management will examine with the Council questions of collections growth and maximizing the use of collections through collaborations and loans.

Funding Restrictions

Question 48: The report also concludes that an enormous boost to research at the Smithsonian would be provided if scholars were freed from current restrictions and permitted to compete with their peers at universities and other institutions for funding from federal agencies such as the National Science Foundation. What restrictions are these and would this require legislative relief to implement this recommendation.

Answer: Current restrictions prevent Smithsonian scholars from competing with their, peers at universities and other research institutions for funding from several Federal agencies. For example, the National Science Foundation currently prohibits the Smithsonian from competing for the full range of funding available by its classification of the Institution as a Federally-Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC) in NSF Circular No. 108. The National Science Foundation has express statutory authority to fund research performed by Federal agencies and other organizations, but limits FFRDC eligibility. FFRDC's are eligible for NSF support only if a proposed project meets one of four exceptions defined in Circular

No. 108. The Smithsonian has repeatedly requested that the National Science Foundation remove its restrictions on applications from Smithsonian scholars.

Second, beginning in FY 1977, the Department of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act has prohibited agencies and organizations, such as the Smithsonian, that are funded in that Act from making grants to or receiving grants from entities funded in the same Act. Thus, the National Endowment for the Arts, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the Institute of Museum Services cannot make grants to the Smithsonian. This prohibition has eliminated an important source of funding for Smithsonian scholars and researchers who may be uniquely qualified to assist these organizations with projects that respond to their mission.

Research funding for Smithsonian scholars would increase if restrictive language in National Science Foundation Circular No. 108 and in the Interior Appropriations Act were eliminated. Smithsonian researchers and scholars are eager to compete with their peers at universities and research institutions for the full range of funding support available. The Smithsonian would welcome any relief that this Committee could provide.

Smithsonian Institution Traveling Exhibition Service

Question 49: The report suggested that an expansion of the SITES program is a way to increase the reach of the Institution and one which is supported by fees. Have you given any consideration to this idea and does the SITES program generate fees sufficient to cover the cost of the program?

Answer: The potential value of expanding the SITES program as a means of increasing the Smithsonian's presence in cities and towns across the nation is being explored in greater and greater detail, as the Institution's 150th anniversary show-America's Smithsonian--generates ever-growing public enthusiasm for traveling exhibitions from the National Mall.

SITES exhibitions already reach millions of Smithsonian visitors beyond Washington every year. Museums, libraries, historical societies, university galleries, science centers, zoos, aquariums, botanical gardens and train depots are among the many host facilities nationwide where people can experience the richness of Smithsonian research initiatives amd collections. Notwithstanding this strong national presence, however, it barely scratches the surface of public demand for opportunities to feature the Smithsonian holdings in communities large and small. The America's Smithsonian exhibit has deepened beyond measure the public's relationship to the Smithsonian, and interest in the Institution as a national treasure that belongs to the people has never been stronger.

Many SITES exhibitions are fee-supported. Many others, however, depend upon outside philanthropic support to defray the cost of rental fees and shipping expenses that museums and other facilities pay in order to host Smithsonian traveling exhibitions. Private sector sponsorship is critical to SITES, because the organization's appropriation (S2.4 million)

nil

and trust allotment ($409,000) cover mostly staff salaries and benefits, rather than exhibit design, production and shipping, which together comprise the largest cost factors associated with traveling exhibitions.

The consideration of whether or not to expand the SITES program in order to meet public demand therefore involves a financial decision. Fee-supported exhibitions can answer the needs of small-scale shows. For larger presentations, however, and especially for exhibits that include significant numbers of original Smithsonian objects, rental fees alone will not cover the growing costs of insurance, production and transportation. These expenses will only be covered through an additional infusion of funds, whether from private philanthropy or appropriations.

Downsizing

Question 50: The report several times references the need to made the tough choices and that existing programs will have to be eliminated or downsized to undertake new higher priorities. As I look at your budget I do not notice any downsizing. In fact your budget proposes some significant increases including 13 new positions for priority program enhancements. How is this consistent with making the tough choices and has the Institution begun any review of the existing activities with any eye toward eliminating existing programs in order to fund higher priority initiatives? For the record please provide a listing of any program eliminations or downsizing that has been accomplished or that is proposed in FY 1997.

Answer: As stated in response to question 40, the Smithsonian is a smaller entity than it was two years ago, differently organized in order to make the most effective use of staff and of decreased levels of Federal funds, while also venturing into new areas, such as those reflected by growing electronic outreach and activities surrounding the Institution's 150th anniversary.

As an example. Secretary Heyman began his administration by reorganizing the Institution's central administration into two major groups: operations, which are within the purview of the Under Secretary, and programs. The reorganization collapsed the offices of three assistant secretaries into a small, cohesive administrative unit under a single Provost. Reassigimient or retirement of the principals, their deputies, and much of their support staff, allowed redirection of resources to areas of greatest need in the program units. The office of a fourth assistant secretary was eliminated altogether. This approach to reorganization through consolidation, elimination, and delayering levels of management is serving as a model for Smithsonian museums, research institutes, and offices as they undertake their own . reorganization efforts.

The overall Institutional strategy is to streamline and stabilize the operational base and facilities infrastructure in order to assure far into the future a lively range of imaginative public programming that will attract and be supported by non-Federal resources. Through internal

processes of planning and evaluation, various activities are likely to be reorganized, streamlined, and even eliminated, while others, such as the National Museum of the American Indian and the Extension of the National Air and Space Museum come into being in fiilfdlment of statutory obligations and Institutional commitments with respect to the collections embraced by those units.

The processes described above are on-going ones. It has not yet been determined how further streamlining will affect Institutional programs in Fiscal Year 1997, but the Voluntary Separation Incentive Program, if nothing else—and the evaluation process will produce other options-is virtually certain to require alternative management and organization strategies in order to fulfill necessary tasks and address new priorities.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY REPRESENTATIVE DAVID E. SKAGGS

Review of Smithsonian Research Activities

Question 51: At last year's hearing, there was a discussion of the extent to which the Smithsonian's basic research activities were coordinated or integrated with research activities carried out or supported by other entities, such as the National Science Foundation, or were subject to periodic peer-review or similar evaluation. At that time, witnesses for the Smithsonian indicated that consideration was being given to establishing a program of regular overall review of the Institution's research activities. Have there been further developments regarding establishment of such a review program? Have there been further steps toward coordination of Smithsonian basic research activities with research work being done by other entitles?

Answer: The new Provost, Dennis O'Connor, has stated from the beginning of his tenure that he is committed to instituting regular, systematic review of the program units. The first months he has devoted to in-depth visits to each of the program units, in order to understand the program activities, and to evaluate for himself the best approach for the Institution to take with regard to review. As stated in last year's testimony, there has not been an overall review of research at the Institution by an outside panel nor a unit by unit systematic approach to reviews. Instead, over the years Assistant Secretaries undertook program reviews of various individual units, particularly in the sciences. In fact, most of our science units have undergone outside peer review within the past five years. What the Provost intends to do before the end of the fiscal year is to formulate a systematic approach to review programs across the Institution, with a timetable and process established for each of the units. Because of the highly diverse nature of the various program units, that process and timetable may vary from unit to unit, but the plan for each, and hence for the whole, should be in place. Such reviews will look at all of our activities, of the scholarly research and the exhibitions and education, for each of our museums and research institutes.

Regarding coordination of our research activities with those of other entities, our scientists are continually in contact with their colleagues and peers both in government and university research enterprises. Their work is primarily one of collaboration, not competition arising from direct overlap. We continue our participation in several interagency committees in research and education, and our researchers work collaboratively with researchers in many government agencies, including some who work within our own Natural History Building, such as scientists from the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the National Marine Fisheries Service. In general, our science does not compete, but is complementary to that of other Federal agencies, since we have unique emphasis, such as in systematic biology at the National Museum of Natural History. In the field of astrophysics, again our work is highly complementary, and coordination occurs, for example, through NASA from which much of our outside grant and contract funding is received.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY REPRESENTATIVE SIDNEY R. YATES

FY 1996 Budget

Question 52: How has the Smithsonian been impacted by the cuts in your FY 1996 appropriation? Have you had to furlough or RIF any employees?

Answer: All Smithsonian units have been impacted by not being funded for mandatory increases in the FY 1996 appropriation. Most have been able to absorb these costs ($10.6 million) through delays or cancellations in purchasing goods and services or in filling positions. In some cases, units do not have the flexibility to absorb these costs and furloughs and RIFs are being considered. With the provision in the FY 1996 appropriation for buyout authority, however, the threat of an Institution-wide furlough has diminished.

There have been some serious impacts of the cuts in the FY 1996 appropriation. The most distressing Institution-wide impacts include:

• Reductions in programs within Museums and Research Institutes

• A slowing of exhibition production schedules, public programs, and collections maintenance

• Delays in implementing electronic/computer improvements which support public access

• Withholding discretionary pay raises and deserved awards

• Curtailment of employee training

• Diminished protection services and increased security risks

Question 53: Have the budget cuts put any of your 140,CXX),000 specimens at risk?

Answer: The compaction of storage remains a severe problem, particularly at the National Museum of Natural History. However, with the continuing move of specimens and objects to the Museum Support Center and the availability of space in the East Court, this will be somewhat alleviated. Reductions continue to inhibit the Institution's ability to hire and train museum technicians to handle general care and maintenance of collections, but it is hoped that the review of collections management policy and programs will suggest new approaches to doing so and that advanced computer programs also will assist.

The increase in the Repair and Restoration account is very important to the preservation of objects and specimens because the first line of defense in their care and conservation is the safety and security of the environment in which they are housed.

Question 54: How wiU the Institution be impacted if efforts to pass the Omnibus appropriations bill fail and the Smithsonian is funded under a continuing resolution for the rest of the fiscal year?

Answer: Had the Omnibus Appropriations Act not been approved, the Institution would, at a minimum, have had to furlough personnel for at least two days. It is likely that reductions-in-force also might have been initiated, but the availability of authority in the Act for a Voluntary Separation Incentive Program seems likely to forestall that action.

FY 1997 Budget at FY 1996 Level

Question 55: You have requested an increase of $10,600,000 over the amount provided in the FY 1996 conference report. What will happen to the Institution if your request is denied and the Smithsonian is funded at the FY 1996 level?

Answer: As stated in response to question 1, 90% of our requested increase is for mandatory costs, most of which are related to pay. Our staff is smaller than it was two years ago, doing more with less, and, frankly, doing it better, even having been through the furloughs and snow days of this past winter that were bruising and, indeed, destructive. The Smithsonian Institution would be nothing without its staff—it is they who increase and diffuse knowledge and it is they who should be paid in a reasonable and timely manner for the work they do so well.

The very modest overall increase that has been requested is designed to stabilize the essential infrastructure of the Smithsonian, which is staff and the few resources used in their work, in order to attract partners—individuals, corporations, and other levels of govemment-to support a lively range of public programs without additional burdens on the Federal budget.

Should funding for the Smithsonian Institution be held at the FY 1996 level, it would seriously erode the Institution's core operations and its ability to meet its obligation to serve the public.

Fundraising

Question 56: In light of the reductions to the Institution's federal appropriation, have you been able to increase private contributions?

Answer: Although the total funds raised for the Institution has increased each year for the last few years, closer examination will show that the increases are the result of a few targeted and restricted major gifts. The Institution diligently seeks private funds wherever it can, especially with the tightening of the federal appropriation. We seek funds that are restricted and unrestricted, with the latter being more valuable in supplementing support for Smithsonian activities.

What has been observed in the last three years is that it is becoming more difficult to attract some of the gifts that were once much more easily secured. Gifts (mm corporations have decreased as corporate giving budgets have been drastically reduced. There is increased

and intense competition among fund seekers for gifts from foundations brought on by the decrease in corporate giving. General unrestricted gifts from individuals have also been affected by decreased federal support. It is extremely difficult to persuade individual donors to support basic infrastructure and daily operations although they will support public programming, exhibitions, and education activities. The public perceives that it is the government's responsibility to support and maintain the facilities, collections, and basic operations of the Institution.

Smithsonian Home Page: www.si.edu

Question 57: What kind of success have you had with the Smithsonian "home page" on the internet? Can you give the Committee some specific examples of how schools have been able to utilize this information?

Answer: Since the release of the Institution-wide "home page" on May 8, 1995, usage has grown by a factor of three and is currently being sustained at about 150,000 "hits" per day or 35 million per year. Unlike most information sources on the Internet, the Smithsonian's usage did not peak shortly after release and then decline twenty to twenty-five per cent but has continued on an ever-upward path. Usage levels are far higher than is typical for other research and educational resources available on the Internet. Although it has proven difficult to directly translate "hits" into "visits" for all of us using this outreach medium at this juncture, we are confident that we are consistently reaching many thousands of people across the country, and around the world, that would not otherwise have access to our outstanding collections and research on a routine basis. Since the May, 1995 release, the amount of Smithsonian material available through the Internet has more than doubled. In addition, the Institution's home page received a number of awards throughout the year, and to a great extent sets the standard for Internet presentation of museum content.

The Smithsonian is particularly encouraged by the emphasis within the education community on establishing Internet connectivity in kindergarten through grade twelve schools and libraries. Although in their infancy, these efforts have resulted in an exponential growth of Internet capability in communities throughout the country, providing a delivery mechanism to place the vast resources of the Smithsonian in every school and library in the nation. Based on feedback to date, students are using the Smithsonian home page as a reference in the preparation of research projects and term papers. In addition, thousands of Smithsonian photographs are now downloaded each month, many for inclusion in school reports. Smithsonian teacher publications are also posted on the home page for users to download to their own computers. On average, 300 copies of teacher materials are now being downloaded each month. In addition to this, Art to Zoo, the Smithsonian's quarterly for teachers is electronically published in a form that allows the user to instantly reference related resources from around the world. This spring, for the first time, the application package for the summer high school intern program was published electronically on the Smithsonian's home page. More than a thousand copies were distributed electronically, which represents almost half the copies that the Institution traditionally would mail.

As well as the direct benefits cited, the Smithsonian's significant Internet presence has helped foster a number of other education and public outreach initiatives. These include a partnership with the Council of Great City Schools in conjunction with their Public Education Network and 21" Century Classroom projects, substantial participation in the privately funded "24 Hours in Cyberspace" program (one of the "One Day in the Life" series), and several corporate-sponsored electronic exhibits.

America's Smithsonian

Question 58: I know that your traveling exhibit, "America's Smithsonian," has been a huge success. Do you have any estimates on the number of people who are expected to visit this exhibit? How much does it cost to mount and display this exhibit? How much is the private sector contributing?

Answer: (1) We estimate that by the time we have completed our proposed tour of twelve cities, as many as 6 million people may have a chance to see and experience America's Smithsonian. Approximately 300,000 visitors attended America's Smithsonian in Los Angeles, where we were open for 31 days, a shorter run than anticipated in other cities. Since the turnout of people and the desire to see the exhibit was tremendous, we made changes to the exhibit for future sites that should allow more people to view it each day. Thus, we estimate that as many 15,000 people may soon comfortably view the show each day it is open.

(2) The cost of mounting and displaying the exhibit in Los Angeles was approximately $10M. This takes into account design and fabrication of exhibitry, as well as preparing objects for use in the exhibit over the two year period. Special conservation of some items, new mounts and special traveling cases are but a few of the preparation costs. Fabrication also included creating and customizing the walls forming the outline of the exhibit, and developing and building some 100 special cases and vitrines designed to display and protect the artifacts. Also included was the labor-intensive task of converting a convention center into a museum exhibition, transport that provided a climate controlled environment, and security for these treasures while in transit and on exhibition.

(3) The America's Smithsonian exhibit is being funded through private sector contributions. In support of our 150th Anniversary, an ambitious corporate partner program is ongoing in raising funds for this endeavor. To date we have four partners supporting the 150th activities through donations valued at $10 million each. They are: TWA, Discover, MCI, and Intel.

Corporate Partnership Program

Question 59: I know that MCI, the long distance telephone company, has begun issuing phone cards with pictures of Smithsonian artifacts on them. What docs the Smithsonian get for allowing these images to be used? At some point, do you mn the risk of

commercializing the Smithsonian by allowing all of these companies to exploit your good name?

Answer: In conjunction with our 150th Anniversary, MCI has become a Corporate Partner with the Institution, for a participation fee of $10 million. The entire $10 million from MCI, as well as the fees from our other three Partners, has been invested in the national Smithsonian anniversary celebration, highlighted by a major traveling exhibition to twelve cities and a birthday party on the Mall in Washington.

One of the benefits to MCI is that they are permitted to use, with our approval, our images in their corporate marketing. The commemorative phone cards are a business contract under the Partnership Program.

We have embarked on this Program with careful planning and a watchful eye. The risk of "commercializing" the Institution is a concern for all of us, but our experience has proved that the corporations with whom we are partnering have almost as much interest in preserving the integrity of the Institution as we do. The high calibre and excellence of the work of the Smithsonian is the reason that the association is worth $10 million to them. If our diligence was comprised, our good name and reputation would no longer attract the same valuable Partners. In addition, major corporations have marketing and promotion budgets that far exceed the Institution's. The impressions of the Smithsonian that we are able to generate through the Corporate Partner Program help us extend the reach of the Institution throughout the country in ways we could not anticipate even one year ago.

Government Shut-down

Question 60: How did the government shut-downs impact museum visitation?

Answer: Visits recorded during the month of November and December 1995 were 1,366,574 below the same period in 1994 as a result of the government shut-downs. This represents a decline of 49%. The January 1996 visitor statistics reflect a decline 400,000 visits or 47% below 1995 levels as a result of the government shut-down and museum closings due to severe inclement weather. Revenue losses related to closed facilities, canceled programs, and disrupted concessions between November and January amounted to $2 million.

National Air and Space Museum Extension at Dulles

Question 61: I notice that you are requesting $5,000,000 for the Air and Space Museum Extension project at Dulles. How much has the State of Virginia contributed to this project? What do you expect the total cost of the project to be?

Answer: In the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Smithsonian and the Commonwealth of Virginia, dated April 22, 1996, Virginia commits to provide $6 million

in appropriated funds for construction, specific access, site work, and infrastructure items valued at (^proximately $40 million, bonding authority up to $100 million, and a $3 million interest-free short-term loan. Virginia will also provide assistance to the Smithsonian with its fund-raising campaign, working with business groups and non-profits operating in the Commonwealth. The total project cost, including master plaiming, design, construction, relocation of the collections, and initial start-up costs, is estimated at approximately $200 million.

National Museum of the American Indian Cultural Resources Center

Question 62: The FY 1996 conference report appropriates $15,000,000 for the National Museum of the American Indian Cultural Resources Center at Suitland, Maryland. The Statement of the Managers that accompanies the Conference Report states that this will be the final federal appropriation for the Suitland structure. Can you complete this important facility with no additional federal funding? Is the damage to the Indian artifacts continuing?

Answer: We do not plan to request additional Federal funds for completion of the Suitland structure. The damage to the Indian artifacts is continuing in NMAI's facility in the Bronx where densely compacted storage of the collections and the deterioration of the building pose constant risk and limit access. We plan to complete construction of and transfer of the collections to the Cultural Resources Center at the earliest possible time.