Director's Annual Report

Facilities And Security

U.S. Courts Design Guide Review
Building Management Delegation Program
Rent Cost-Containment Initiatives
Court Security Initiatives
Emergency Preparedness
Off-Site Court Operations Support Center
Emergency Communications Program

U.S. Courts Design Guide Review

A highly participative, comprehensive review of the U.S. Courts Design Guide with a focus on function, technology, and cost began in October 2004 as a Judiciary cost-containment initiative. Using more than 1,000 comments from judges, court unit executives, the GSA, and other stakeholders, discussion groups of liaisons from seven Judicial Conference committees and court unit executives met in November 2004, February 2005, and March 2005.

They proposed revisions for chambers and court office space, which were circulated for comment in April. Although the Judicial Conference Committee on Security and Facilities recommended 18 revisions on chambers and court office space to the September 2005 Judicial Conference, only revisions for court office space were endorsed. Recommendations for chambers space modifications were recommitted to the Committee on Space and Facilities for further consideration. Technical revisions, such as public spaces and atria, lighting, heating ventilation and air conditioning, acoustics, and finishes will be proposed in the completely revised Design Guide for consideration by the Judicial Conference in September 2006.

Building Management Delegation Program

The Judiciary has participated in the building management delegation program of GSA since it was approved by the Judicial Conference as a pilot program in March 1988. The Administrative Office entered into real property operations and building management delegation agreements for district court facilities in Birmingham, Alabama; Miami, Florida; and West Palm Beach, Florida. In 2004, GSA shifted additional maintenance responsibilities to the courts for these buildings. Those courts had to plan and budget for projected and unforeseen repairs above typical daily building maintenance. Higher operating costs resulted for the Judiciary.

As a cost savings measure, the September 2005 Judicial Conference endorsed ending the Judiciary's participation in the building management delegation program. The Conference supported development of a transition plan to return the operation and management of those court facilities to GSA.

Rent Cost-Containment Initiatives

Pursuit of several initiatives to contain the current and future costs of rent the Judiciary pays to the GSA continued in 2005. Required rental payments have forced a 6 percent reduction in Judiciary staff and shortages in other critical areas. Among those initiatives were:

• Space Moratorium Extended. Implementation of a one-year space moratorium, endorsed by the Judicial Conference in March 2004, was extended another year in March 2005. The space moratorium is estimated to avoid $6 million in rent by deferring or canceling space requests under the moratorium that cost less than $2.36 million in fiscal year 2005.
  
• Rent Bill Review. A review of rental bills of individual court facilities has realized some rental cost savings through three efforts. First, Administrative Office staff involved the courts nationwide in a review of their rent bills. Discrepancies in those bills were reported to GSA. Second, the district court for New York-Northern embarked on a thorough analysis of its rental charges, which uncovered serious overcharges by GSA. In response, GSA issued a $3.2 million rent credit to the Judiciary and began its own nationwide rent validation review. Third, an additional $10 million in rent credits were identified because GSA misapplied its pricing policies at the Patrick Moynihan Courthouse in New York City.
  
• Nationwide Rent Validation. The success of the rent bill review in New York prompted formation of a team of court and Administrative Office employees. It is developing plans to implement a nationwide Judiciary rent validation program. Nationwide rent validation will entail verifying the accuracy of the rent bill for each court facility, challenging the rental rates where applicable, and educating court employees in monitoring any future changes to GSA rent bills and space assignments.
  
• Rent Relief. To seek relief from mandatory rent payments to GSA, which have consumed 22 percent of the Judiciary's salaries and expenses budget, the Administrative Office Director and the Committee on Security and Facilities launched several efforts to contain rent costs. In December 2004, a request was sent to the GSA Administrator seeking a $483 million reduction in the current fiscal year rent bill of $924 million. The objective of this effort was to pay only for the actual costs of operation and maintenance of the courts, since the costs of the land and buildings had already been paid. This request was followed by a protest about another aspect of GSA's rental policy, which requires federal agencies to pay the equivalent of state and local taxes.

GSA refused both requests, despite a meeting of the Judiciary with the Office of Management and Budget to urge the Administration to grant rent relief, and strong support from Senator Specter and 10 other senior members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. GSA has granted such relief to the Congress and the executive branch, which pay less than one percent of their budgets for rent. At least 14 Executive Branch agencies enjoy rent exemptions, while rent relief is denied to the Judiciary.

As another approach, the Committee on Security and Facilities recommended that the Judicial Conference reaffirm its support for legislation to establish independent real property authority for the Judiciary, separate from GSA, a position originally adopted in 1989. The Conference recommitted the matter to the Committee on Space and Facilities so that it may develop and submit in consultation with the Judicial Conference Committee on the Budget, an implementation plan for consideration in 2006. Director Mecham sent a proposed $500 million rent relief to Congress in October. It is expected that the Senate will consider a rent veto bill for the Judiciary soon.

Court Security Initiatives

The Administrative Office was engaged in two major court security initiatives during fiscal year 2005.

Federal Protective Service Cost Reduction. Since 1999, the cost of security services provided by the Federal Protective Service (FPS) to the Judiciary has risen by an average of 25 percent each year. Absent any action by the Judiciary, bills for FPS contract guard services were projected to increase to $79 million in 2005, from $19 million in 1999. When Congress provided $21 million less than the amount requested for these services in 2005, the Administrative Office and the Committee on Security and Facilities pursued reducing or eliminating FPS contract guard services at federal court facilities. In January and May 2005, all chief judges were notified of the immediate need to reduce or eliminate redundant services and provided guidance on making those cuts. Staff continued to work with the courts and the FPS to ensure reductions occurred. These final cost-reduction efforts were successful, with final FPS bills coming in at $65 million.

Off-Site Security and Home Intrusion Detection Systems. The murders of Judge Joan Lefkow's husband and mother underscored the importance of reviewing off-site security for federal judges and their families. As emphasized by a March 2005 resolution of the Judicial Conference and its subsequent supplemental security request to the President and Congress, this review of off-site security would involve the Department of Justice, U.S. Marshals Service (USMS), and the Administrative Office.

In May 2005, the President signed P.L. No. 109-13, the FY 2005 Iraqi War and Tsunami Relief Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Bill, which provided $11.9 million in fiscal year 2005 to the USMS for increased judicial security outside of courthouse facilities, including home intrusion detection systems for federal judges. The appropriations language provided that, "In coordination with the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, the USMS shall submit a spending plan to the Committees on Appropriations prior to the obligation of any of these funds." On September 23, 2005 , the Department of Justice submitted to Congress a proposed financial plan that included $8.5 of the $11.9 million for home intrusion detection systems for judges. The USMS awarded a national vendor contract in December. The USMS plans to begin installation of systems in January 2006. Late in 2005, AO staff and Committee members were successful in obtaining a commitment from the USMS to pay for the monitoring and maintenance fees in fiscal year 2006. The funding for those fees had been a major impediment to program implementation. The Judiciary contended that the systems must be monitored, and that the supplemental funding should pay for that service, as well as maintenance, and that both were part of the USMS's statutory responsibility for judicial security. AO staff and the new Judicial Conference Committee on Judicial Security have been working with the USMS to implement the Home Intrusion Detection System Program for all federal judges and their families.

Emergency Preparedness

Emergency and continuity of operations plans (COOPs) are implemented in the courts according to Administrative Office guidelines that mirror those of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Each court is responsible for planning for its continued operation in the event of a disaster or other interruption. The Administrative Office has recommended the designation of a senior executive in every court to coordinate and be responsible for developing appropriate procedures for emergency preparedness, and a COOP. Courts coordinate their planning activities with FEMA and local federal executive agencies. During the past year, several emergency preparedness training opportunities were announced to the courts. Nearly 200 court personnel attended the COOP Program Manager "Train-the Trainer" course at several FEMA sites nationwide and at the Administrative Office. All of the courts of appeals have participated in table-top exercises to test their COOPs.

Hurricanes Katrina and Rita had an immense impact on the operations of courts in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, although every court affected had fully prepared and tested its COOP plan. Throughout the 2005 hurricane season, 70 court units from Houston to Miami experienced some break in telecommunications. More than 1,500 court employees were affected by these hurricanes. The Administrative Office is continuing to coordinate the Judiciary's response to the operational needs of those courts in areas such as procurement, space and facilities, information technology, travel, finance and budget, human resources, legal counsel and legislative affairs, court administration, and public affairs.

Off-Site Court Operations Support Center

The Court Operations Support Center (COSC) was established in the suburbs outside Washington, DC during the year, as authorized by Congress (P.L. No.108-7). GSA selected the location, which includes a data center housing critical systems software, hardware, and support staff; disbursing operations and critical financial systems support; a court personnel and payroll operations team; office space, conference and training rooms, a communications center, and a telework center. The disbursing office issues approximately 130,000 U.S. Treasury checks annually to panel attorneys from the Criminal Justice Act Panel Attorney System. The COSC will ensure that key administrative and technical support to the courts continue uninterrupted in the event the Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building in Washington, DC is rendered inaccessible.

Emergency Communications Program

During 2005, the Administrative Office provided emergency team members with communications equipment for daily business use and in support of continuity of operations. Each team member now has a Blackberry device, which supports essential business requirements including e-mail and cellular calling, and other means of communicating during an emergency. An electronic address book application for the Blackberry has been developed, which provides AO emergency team users with team contact information, so that each team member can be reached when necessary. Emergency laptop systems also have been distributed, to enable essential personnel to access the Judiciary's Data Communications Network and their vital data files. Essential personnel have also received satellite telephones for both work and home locations.